ArticlePloS one2024
Event-related potentials of stimuli inhibition and access in cross-modal distractor-induced blindness.
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.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Distractor-induced blindness (DIB) describes a reduced access to a cued visual target-if multiple target-like distractors have been presented beforehand. Previous ERP data suggest a cumulative frontal inhibition triggered by distractors, which affects the updating process of the upcoming target. In the present study, we examine whether the modality of the cue-formerly defined in the visual domain-affects the expression of these neural signatures. 27 subjects were tested in a cross-modal DIB task: Distractors and targets were defined by a transient change of stimuli shape in a random-dot kinematogram. The onset of the target was announced by a rise in amplitude of a sinusoidal tone. Behavioral results confirmed that detection of the target relies on the number of preceding distractor episodes. Replicating previous unimodal results, ERP responses to distractors were characterized by a frontal negativity starting at 100 ms, which increases with an increasing number of distractor episodes. However, the processing-and detection-of the target was not characterized by a more-expressed P3 response, but by an occipital negativity. The current data confirm that the neural signatures of target awareness depend on the experimental setup used: In case of the DIB, the cross-modal setting might lead to a reduction of attentional resources in the visual domain.
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.