ArticlePsychological research2024
Memory-driven capture during focused visual attention.
Article in Psychological research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring boundary conditions of goal-driven attentional capture by affective categories: the role of prioritisation in working memory.Psychological research · 2026Article
- Identical Attentional Capture with Different Working Memory Representation Precision.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
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
Attention can be captured by the presence of distractors that match the current content of working memory in the visual field. This memory-driven capture is well established when observers adopt diffused attentional settings prior to the onset of memory-matching distractors. However, it remains unclear whether memory-driven capture can occur when observers are in a state of focused attention. The present study attempted to address this question by examining whether memory-matching distractors can disrupt performance on a focused attention task. Participants were asked to hold a sample word in working memory and then had to name a central color while ignoring an irrelevant distractor word in the visual display. In Experiments 1 and 2, the distractor word was always presented centrally within the focus of attention. In Experiment 3, the distractor word could be presented either at the center or at the periphery (i.e., outside the focus of attention). The results showed that the irrelevant distractor word within the focus of attention interfered with color-naming performance when it matched the sample word held in working memory. However, no interference effect was observed when the distractor word was presented outside the attentional focus. The present findings indicate that working memory-driven capture during a state of focused visual attention depends crucially on whether or not memory-matching distractors are positioned within the focus of attention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38478053What 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.