Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40053158›Full record

ArticleExperimental brain research2025

Perceptual decoupling in the sustained attention to response task is likely: comment on Bedi, Russell, & Helton (2024).

Shivang Shelat, Barry Giesbrecht

Abstract readLetter
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Experimental brain research, 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.

Shivang ShelatDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA, USA. sshelat@ucsb.edu.
Barry GiesbrechtDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA, USA.

Funding

Institute for Collaborative Biotechnologies W911NF-19-2-0026National Science Foundation 2139319
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent work by Bedi et al. (Experimental Brain Research 242(8):2033-2040, 2024) posits that perceptual decoupling in the sustained attention to response task (SART) is unlikely. In this commentary, we challenge their broad titular claim by revisiting two important studies: Smallwood et al. (Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 20(3):45, 2008) and deBettencourt et al. (Nature Human Behaviour 3(8):808-816, 2019). These studies demonstrate that lapses in attention during the SART are associated with degraded neural responses and impaired memory encoding. Diminished P300 amplitudes during commission errors and periods of mind-wandering suggest that external perceptual processing is compromised when attention shifts inward. Moreover, recent methodological innovations that integrate real-time monitoring of attentional state have provided evidence of perceptual decoupling in the SART using an interleaved working memory task. Our review is meant to reaffirm the task's value in studying sustained attention, mind-wandering, and perceptual decoupling. We argue that existing evidence supports a conjecture that perceptual decoupling in the SART is likely, and that valuable new methods allow us to pivot away from commission errors as a behavioral proxy for lapsing attention.

Indexed as

AttentionMemory, Short-TermPsychomotor PerformanceElectroencephalographyEvent-Related Potentials, P300HumansMind-wanderingPerceptual decouplingResponse biasSustained attention

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.