ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2024
Investigating mechanisms of the attentional repulsion effect: A diffusion model analysis.
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article investigates the decisional and attentional drivers of the attentional repulsion effect (ARE) using the diffusion decision model (DDM). The ARE is a phenomenon in which a subjective expansion of space is experienced outside the focus of attention. It is thought to occur due to changes in the functioning of visual cell receptive fields. The DDM is a model of the decision-making process that assumes responses are selected by sequentially sampling an encoded representation of a stimulus until sufficient evidence has been accumulated favoring one response alternative over the other. The model decomposes observed choice and response times into different latent variables corresponding to the rate of evidence accumulation, response caution, response bias, and the time course of stimulus encoding and response execution. In this article, we interpret changes in the rate of evidence accumulation as primarily reflecting perceptual-driven changes in stimulus representation. We interpret changes in response bias as primarily reflecting decision-level changes. We utilize the DDM's ability to estimate these variables independently to explore how they are each affected by cueing manipulations to clarify whether the ARE emerges due to attentional or decisional drivers, or some combination of the two. The results of this study could shed light on the mechanisms underlying the ARE, and has implications in our understanding of spatial attention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38169043What 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.