ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2024
Limitations on flexible allocation of visual short-term memory resources with multiple levels of goal-directed attentional prioritization.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Impaired visuospatial working memory but preserved attentional control in bipolar disorder.Psychological medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Studies suggest that visual short-term memory (VSTM) is a continuous resource that can be flexibly allocated using probabilistic cues that indicate test likelihood (i.e., goal-directed attentional priority to those items). Previous studies using simultaneous cues have not examined this flexible allocation beyond two distinct levels of priority. Moreover, previous studies have not examined whether there are individual differences in the ability to flexibly allocate VSTM resources, as well as whether this ability benefits from practice. The current study used a continuous report procedure to examine whether participants can use up to three levels of attentional priority to allocate VSTM resources via simultaneous probabilistic spatial cues. Three experiments were performed with differing priority levels, cues, and cue presentation times. Group level analysis demonstrated flexible allocation of VSTM resources; however, there was limited evidence that participants could use three goal-directed priority levels. A temporal analysis suggested that task fatigue, rather than practice effects, may interact with item priority. A Bayesian individual-differences analysis revealed that a minority of participants were using three levels of attentional priority, demonstrating that, while possible, it is not the predominant pattern of behaviour. Thus, we provided evidence that flexible allocation to three attention levels is possible under simultaneous cuing conditions for a minority of participants. Flexible allocation to three categories may be interpreted as a skill of high-performing participants akin to high memory capacity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37985598What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.