ReviewAttention, perception & psychophysics2024
Terms of debate: Consensus definitions to guide the scientific discourse on visual distraction.
Review 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 37 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
37 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Interruption in visual search: a systematic review.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Pooled it
- Awake alpha bursting emerges as the dynamic working state in a lateral geniculate thalamocortical cell model.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- On the Difficulty of Identifying Cognitive Causes.Computational brain & behavior · 2026Article
- Decision rules diverge between sympatric Featherfin cichlids despite shared preferences, ecology, and evolutionary history.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Attentional tuning to color in efficient visual search: Evidence for optimal peak shifts and relational asymmetry.Journal of vision · 2026Article
- Parallel or clump-wise serial? A reinterpretation of feature-search mode.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026Article
- Developing a consensus research definition for profound autism using a modified Delphi method.Molecular autism · 2026Article
- 35+ years of the additional singleton task: Design features and guidelines.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026Review
- Effort expectation and strategic cue use in visual search.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2026Article
- Rapid Inversion of Singleton Distractor Representations Underlies Learned Attentional Suppression.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026Article
- Article
- Predictive Distractor Processing Relies on Integrated Proactive and Reactive Attentional Mechanisms.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026Article
- Avoidance of capture by motion onset.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026Article
- Rapid inversion of singleton distractor representations underlies learned attentional suppression.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- The Attention Habit II: How selection history shapes the strategic control of attention.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Review
- Anticipatory and reactive mechanisms of habituation to visual distractors.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Cueing distractors is effective when the incentive to suppress is high.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2025Article
- Learning Modulates Early Encephalographic Responses to Distracting Stimuli: A Combined SSVEP and ERP Study.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- Attention directs actions in visual foraging.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The consequences of color chromaticity on electrophysiological measures of attentional deployment in visual search.iScience · 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
21 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Hypothesis-driven research rests on clearly articulated scientific theories. The building blocks for communicating these theories are scientific terms. Obviously, communication - and thus, scientific progress - is hampered if the meaning of these terms varies idiosyncratically across (sub)fields and even across individual researchers within the same subfield. We have formed an international group of experts representing various theoretical stances with the goal to homogenize the use of the terms that are most relevant to fundamental research on visual distraction in visual search. Our discussions revealed striking heterogeneity and we had to invest much time and effort to increase our mutual understanding of each other's use of central terms, which turned out to be strongly related to our respective theoretical positions. We present the outcomes of these discussions in a glossary and provide some context in several essays. Specifically, we explicate how central terms are used in the distraction literature and consensually sharpen their definitions in order to enable communication across theoretical standpoints. Where applicable, we also explain how the respective constructs can be measured. We believe that this novel type of adversarial collaboration can serve as a model for other fields of psychological research that strive to build a solid groundwork for theorizing and communicating by establishing a common language. For the field of visual distraction, the present paper should facilitate communication across theoretical standpoints and may serve as an introduction and reference text for newcomers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.