Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39557812›Full record

ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2025

The self-relevant spotlight metaphor: Self-relevant targets diminish distractor-response-binding effects.

Marcel Pauly, Sarah Schäfer, Dirk Wentura, Christian Frings

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2025. 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

4 authors.

Marcel PaulyDepartment of Psychology, Saarland University, Campus A2 4, 66123, Saarbrücken, Germany. marcel.pauly@uni-saarlande.de.
Sarah SchäferUniversity of Trier, Trier, Germany.
Dirk WenturaDepartment of Psychology, Saarland University, Campus A2 4, 66123, Saarbrücken, Germany.
Christian FringsUniversity of Trier, Trier, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recently, it has been proposed that self-relevance of a stimulus enhances executive control and reduces the impact of distractors on current task performance. The present study aimed to test whether the binding between a distractor and a response is influenced by self-relevance, too. We assumed that targets' self-relevance should increase executive control processes and therefore reduce the influence of distractors on current performance. In a distractor-response-binding (DRB) task, which measures the strength of binding between distractor stimuli and responses, we varied target relevance so that participants responded to targets that either were or were not self-relevant. Our design made it possible to measure DRB effects for both relevance conditions separately. DRB effects were diminished if targets were self-relevant compared to when they were not. These results expand our understanding of the influence of self-relevance on cognitive performance. The influence of self-relevance is not purely perceptual (Sui & Humphreys, 2012, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38[5], 1105-1117), but also found in higher-order processes such as executive control. Moreover, whereas for different paradigms binding advantages of self-relevance are assumed (Sui & Humphreys, 2015a, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19[12], 719-728; Humphreys & Sui, 2016, Cognitive Neuroscience, 7[1/4], 5-17), this study identifies an important boundary condition, in that distractor-response binding is reduced by target self-relevance.

Indexed as

AttentionExecutive FunctionMetaphorPsychomotor PerformanceAdultFemaleHumansMaleYoung AdultCognitive controlDistractor–response bindingExecutive controlSelf-relevance

Identifiers

PMID39557812
PMCPMC12092483

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.