Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40195268›Full record

ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2025

How robust is categorial distractor suppression? Assessing the impact of additional categories and increased set size.

Jessica N Goetz, Mark B Neider

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
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.

Jessica N GoetzDepartment of Psychology, University of Central Florida, 4111 Pictor Lane, Psychology Bldg 99 Ste. 320, Orlando, FL, 32816-1390, USA. jessica.goetz@ucf.edu.
Mark B NeiderDepartment of Psychology, University of Central Florida, 4111 Pictor Lane, Psychology Bldg 99 Ste. 320, Orlando, FL, 32816-1390, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Distractor suppression is the process of utilizing top-down information about distractors to improve search performance. Most studies have utilized simple stimuli and concluded that basic visual features are suppressed. However, recent studies have shown that categorical information can be suppressed, albeit with limited categories and display set sizes. In three experiments, we examined whether suppression for categorical distractors remained robust in more realistic search conditions by increasing the number of categories and display set sizes. Across our experiments, we modified previous experiments' paradigms where participants searched for specific t orientations that were embedded in categorical objects. In Experiment 1, we increased the number of categories. In Experiment 2, we only increased the display set size. In Experiment 3, we increased both the number of categories and the display set size. Response times were faster on trials where the cued distractor category appeared, indicating distractor suppression effects in Experiments 1 and 2 but not Experiment 3. Combined, the results suggest that categorical distractor suppression effects likely occur in more realistic contexts, but other more beneficial search strategies may also be employed with increased task complexity.

Indexed as

AttentionInhibition, PsychologicalOrientationPattern Recognition, VisualAdultCuesDiscrimination, PsychologicalFemaleHumansMaleReaction TimeYoung AdultAttentionCategorical cueingDistractor suppression

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.