Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39994138›Full record

ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2025

Practice makes perfect, especially when doing what we like.

Irene Reppa, Siné McDougall

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 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

2 authors.

Irene ReppaSchool of Psychology, Swansea University, Swansea, SA2 8PP, UK. i.reppa@swansea.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2853-2311
Siné McDougallDepartment of Psychology, Bournemouth University, Bournemouth, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previous research has found that aesthetic appeal can facilitate visual search performance. One avenue of enquiry is that appealing icons are processed better than unappealing icons. If appealing stimuli are better processed, then it may be expected that they will benefit from practice more than their unappealing counterparts. In the current study (N = 100) we examined the effect of stimulus appeal on visual search performance. Half of the participants searched for appealing icons first, followed by unappealing icons, and the order was reversed for the other half. First, visual search performance benefited from stimulus appeal, and specifically the interaction of stimulus appeal and complexity - visual stimulus appeal led to better search performance but only for stimuli that were visually complex, with no effect of appeal for visually simple stimuli. Second, task experience benefited appealing icons more than unappealing icons. These results extend current knowledge of the status of visual aesthetic appeal on performance. They provide new evidence that appealing stimuli benefit from practice and are easier to learn compared to their unappealing counterparts.

Indexed as

AttentionEstheticsPattern Recognition, VisualPractice, PsychologicalAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMaleYoung AdultAesthetic appealAttentionPractice effectsVisual search

Identifiers

PMID39994138
PMCPMC11965255

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.