ArticleBehavior research methods2024
Reliably measuring learning-dependent distractor suppression with eye tracking.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Orienting bias towards electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) cues.Addictive behaviors reports · 2026Article
- 35+ years of the additional singleton task: Design features and guidelines.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026Review
- Signal suppression makes search less effortful.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2026Article
- Extinction of outcome-specific Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT), instrumental outcome devaluation, and reward-related attentional capture are predicted by affect-driven impulsivity.Learning & behavior · 2025Article
- Eye movement evidence for locus coeruleus-noradrenaline system contributions to age differences in attention.Psychology and aging · 2025Article
- The effect of reward and punishment on the extinction of attentional capture elicited by value-related stimuli.Psychological research · 2025Article
- Eye movements reveal age differences in how arousal modulates saliency priority but not attention processing speed.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In the field of psychological science, behavioral performance in computer-based cognitive tasks often exhibits poor reliability. The absence of reliable measures of cognitive processes contributes to non-reproducibility in the field and impedes the investigation of individual differences. Specifically in visual search paradigms, response time-based measures have shown poor test-retest reliability and internal consistency across attention capture and distractor suppression, but one study has demonstrated the potential for oculomotor measures to exhibit superior reliability. Therefore, in this study, we investigated three datasets to compare the reliability of learning-dependent distractor suppression measured via distractor fixations (oculomotor capture) and latency to fixate the target (fixation times). Our findings reveal superior split-half reliability of oculomotor capture compared to that of fixation times regardless of the critical distractor comparison, with the reliability of oculomotor capture in most cases falling within the range that is acceptable for the investigation of individual differences. We additionally find that older adults have superior oculomotor reliability compared with young adults, potentially addressing a significant limitation in the aging literature of high variability in response time measures due to slower responses. Our findings highlight the utility of measuring eye movements in the pursuit of reliable indicators of distractor processing and the need to further test and develop additional measures in other sensory domains to maximize statistical power, reliability, and reproducibility.
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.