Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39436912›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Pop-out effects revisited: Within-array category pop-out and novel pop-out effects with picture stimuli.

John D McCarthy, Phil Reed

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

John D McCarthySchool of Psychology, Swansea University, Swansea, United Kingdom.
Phil ReedSchool of Psychology, Swansea University, Swansea, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8157-0747

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pop-out effects occur when a novel or different stimulus is presented in the context of an array of otherwise familiar or similar stimuli. The effect has been studied using words extensively, but little evidence exists for humans relating to nonverbal stimuli. Although the finding has implications for understanding features of stimuli that capture attention, contradictory findings exist, and previous paradigms have limited applicability to real world situations. Given this, an experiment employed a novel procedure to investigate whether category pop-out effects, where one item is drawn from a different category to the others, could be obtained with pictorial stimulus array. It also investigated whether pop-out effects could be generated with a single continuous pre-exposure procedure, as would be experienced in a naturalistic setting, or whether they were the results of biases introduced by the repetitive pre-exposure procedures, typically used in such studies. The latter finding would undermine the use of such findings to support ecologically-valid models of attention. Both of these questions were answered in the affirmative: category pop-out effects were obtained using picture stimuli; and such effects were obtained with a single continuous pre-exposure. Further development this novel procedure may allow exploration of evolutionary and neurological aspects of selective attention effects.

Indexed as

AttentionPhotic StimulationAdultFemaleHumansMalePattern Recognition, VisualReaction TimeVisual PerceptionYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID39436912
PMCPMC11495641

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.