ArticleBehavior research methods2024
On the reliability of value-modulated attentional capture: An online replication and multiverse analysis.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- The role of selective attention in value-modulated attentional capture.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Article
- Dynamic salience as a basis for behavioural meta-malleability.Royal Society open science · 2026Review
- A Mouse-Tracking Paradigm for Value-Driven Attentional Capture.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Orienting bias towards electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) cues.Addictive behaviors reports · 2026Article
- Unifying temporal preparation: The temporal preparation task (TEP-Task).Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- Replicating the unconscious working memory effect: a multisite Registered Report.Neuroscience of consciousness · 2026Article
- Extinction of outcome-specific Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT), instrumental outcome devaluation, and reward-related attentional capture are predicted by affect-driven impulsivity.Learning & behavior · 2025Article
- Value-modulated attentional capture depends on awareness.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Article
- Assessing the validity evidence for habit measures based on time pressure.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Single scores in the RT-based value-driven attentional capture paradigm have high reliability.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The effect of reward and punishment on the extinction of attentional capture elicited by value-related stimuli.Psychological research · 2025Article
- Reliably measuring learning-dependent distractor suppression with eye tracking.Behavior research methods · 2024Article
- Reliably Measuring Learning-Dependent Distractor Suppression with Eye Tracking.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stimuli predicting rewards are more likely to capture attention, even when they are not relevant to our current goals. Individual differences in value-modulated attentional capture (VMAC) have been associated with various psychopathological conditions in the scientific literature. However, the claim that this attentional bias can predict individual differences requires further exploration of the psychometric properties of the most common experimental paradigms. The current study replicated the VMAC effect in a large online sample (N = 182) and investigated the internal consistency, with a design that allowed us to measure the effect during learning (rewarded phase) and after acquisition, once feedback was omitted (unrewarded phase). Through the rewarded phase there was gradual increase of the VMAC effect, which did not decline significantly throughout the unrewarded phase. Furthermore, we conducted a reliability multiverse analysis for 288 different data preprocessing specifications across both phases. Specifications including more blocks in the analysis led to better reliability estimates in both phases, while specifications that removed more outliers also improved reliability, suggesting that specifications with more, but less noisy, trials led to better reliability estimates. Nevertheless, in most instances, especially those considering fewer blocks of trials, reliability estimates fell below the minimum recommended thresholds for research on individual differences. Given the present results, we encourage researchers working on VMAC to take into account reliability when designing studies aimed at capturing individual differences and provide recommendations to improve methodological practices.
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.