ArticleeLife2025
Neural mechanisms of learned suppression uncovered by probing the hidden attentional priority map.
Article in eLife, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Past and present goals are represented concurrently during visual search.PLoS biology · 2026Article
- 35+ years of the additional singleton task: Design features and guidelines.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026Review
- When forewarned is not forearmed: No evidence for cue-based proactive control in the spatial Stroop task.Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance · 2026Article
- Exploring spatial and temporal constraints in suppression of distractors.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026Article
- Carry-over effect of learned distractor suppression on visual working memory.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Article
- Learning Modulates Early Encephalographic Responses to Distracting Stimuli: A Combined SSVEP and ERP Study.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- The consequences of color chromaticity on electrophysiological measures of attentional deployment in visual search.iScience · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Attentional capture by an irrelevant salient distractor is attenuated when the distractor appears more frequently in one location, suggesting learned suppression of that location. However, it remains unclear whether suppression is proactive (before attention is directed) or reactive (after attention is allocated). Here, we investigated this using a 'pinging' technique to probe the attentional distribution before search onset. In an EEG experiment, participants searched for a shape singleton while ignoring a color singleton distractor at a high-probability location. To reveal the hidden attentional priority map, participants also performed a continuous recall spatial memory task, with a neutral placeholder display presented before search onset. Behaviorally, search was more efficient when the distractor appeared at the high-probability location. Inverted encoding analysis of EEG data showed tuning profiles that decayed during memory maintenance but were revived by the placeholder display. Notably, tuning was most pronounced at the to-be-suppressed location, suggesting initial spatial selection followed by suppression. These findings suggest that learned distractor suppression is a reactive process, providing new insights into learned spatial distractor suppression mechanisms.
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.