ArticlePsychological research2024
Generalization of sequence effects from conflict to cueing tasks.
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 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.
- Aimed-movement responses and distributional analysis indicate distinctive cognitive control mechanisms in arrow cueing tasks.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cognitive control has been investigated in attentional conflict tasks for a long time. One representative phenomenon of adaptive cognitive control in these tasks is the congruency sequence effect (CSE), which means that a previous conflict will lead to reduced congruency effects at the current moment, reflecting increased control of attention toward the task at hand. One debating question is whether CSE can generalize between different conditions. Since a similar phenomenon (i.e., validity sequence effect, VSE) has been found in spatial cueing tasks, this study investigated whether the two sequential effects could generalize between each other. A cross-task sequence effect is found from previous flanker trials to current cueing trials when the task sets of the two tasks are either very similar or sufficiently dissimilar, and this C-VSE effect is influenced by the response mode of the experimental design. In addition, the VSE between trial n-2 and trial n is eliminated by the existence of an intermediate flanker trial, but the CSE between trial n-2 and trial n is still significant even with an intermediate cueing trial. Possible explanations of these findings are discussed. The findings suggest a close connection between orienting and executive control processes in attention networks and provide a new perspective and method for investigating the potential mechanisms of cognitive control.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39088012What 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.