Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40212307›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025

Visual attentional differences in psychology students with and without disabilities: a pilot study assessing the flanker task for prescriptive visual accommodative technologies.

Anders Chan, Zachary I Harkinish-Murray, Sabrina Colmone, Jessica E Orens, Sharon Thomas, Nicole Albanese, Katherine McCabe, Rui Freitas, Stephanie P Bailey, Ravi L Ramdhari and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 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

16 authors.

Anders ChanDepartment of Psychology, SUNY Old Westbury, Old Westbury, NY, United States.
Zachary I Harkinish-MurrayDepartment of Psychology, SUNY Old Westbury, Old Westbury, NY, United States.
Sabrina ColmoneDepartment of Psychology, SUNY Old Westbury, Old Westbury, NY, United States.
Jessica E OrensDepartment of Psychology, SUNY Old Westbury, Old Westbury, NY, United States.
Sharon ThomasSUNY Neuroscience Research Institute, SUNY Old Westbury, Old Westbury, NY, United States.
Nicole AlbaneseSUNY Neuroscience Research Institute, SUNY Old Westbury, Old Westbury, NY, United States.
Katherine McCabeDepartment of Psychology, SUNY Old Westbury, Old Westbury, NY, United States.
Rui FreitasDepartment of Psychology, SUNY Old Westbury, Old Westbury, NY, United States.
Stephanie P BaileyDepartment of Psychology, SUNY Old Westbury, Old Westbury, NY, United States.
Ravi L RamdhariDepartment of Psychology, SUNY Old Westbury, Old Westbury, NY, United States.
Michael T VerrengiaDepartment of Psychology, SUNY Old Westbury, Old Westbury, NY, United States.
Kainaat F SiddiquiDepartment of Psychology, SUNY Old Westbury, Old Westbury, NY, United States.
Oscar E LopezDepartment of Psychology, SUNY Old Westbury, Old Westbury, NY, United States.
Stacey DeFeliceOffice of Services for Students with Disabilities, SUNY Old Westbury, Old Westbury, NY, United States.
Basabi Runi MukherjiDepartment of Psychology, SUNY Old Westbury, Old Westbury, NY, United States.
Lorenz S NeuwirthDepartment of Psychology, SUNY Old Westbury, Old Westbury, NY, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The percentage of college students with disabilities has been growing and has doubled in the last two decades; thus, students with disabilities are pursuing college degrees in increasing numbers. Unfortunately, this population growth has not been matched with growth in available accommodative technologies in institutions of higher learning. Colleges and universities often do not have resources to fund and provide specific accommodative technology and support for this steadily increasing population. What is worse is that there is also a lag in emergent assessment and screening tools which are required to match student disabilities with appropriate accommodative technologies, resulting in a mismatch between student needs with Materials and methods: Undergraduate psychology students with and without disabilities volunteered to participate in a triple-blind study that sought to investigate whether their visual attention performance on a 10-min Flanker Task could be used to predict which students might benefit from visual accommodative technologies. The first experiment was used as a negative control to assess whether environmental distractions could interfere with participant visual attention. The second experiment compared the Flanker Task performance of students with and without disabilities in a controlled Neuropsychology Laboratory sound-attenuated environment. The third experiment evaluated the cumulative records for percent (%) accuracy and reaction times (RTs) for students with and without disabilities to examine patterns in visual attentional performance. The fourth experiment disaggregated the students with disabilities and examined their patterns in visual attentional performance. Results: The results showed the Flanker Task was sensitive in detecting differences in students' visual attention performance between noisy and controlled environments differentiated students with and without disabilities. Furthermore, when students with disabilities were aggregated, their Flanker Task cumulative records were sensitive in detecting shifts in their visual attention behavior patterns. Lastly, the Flanker Task cumulative records were also sensitive in detecting disaggregated students with disability differences in their visual attention performance. Conclusion: The pilot study proved promising that a 10-min Flanker Task can be used as an effective screening tool to match students with disabilities with appropriate accommodative technologies based on their visual attentional abilities. This type of screening tool is easy to create, has minimal cost, and can be implemented quickly. This provides colleges and universities with an easy approach to assessing the needs of students with disabilities and tailoring appropriate assistive technologies.

Indexed as

Gazepoint eye trackingpilot studystudents with a disabilityundergraduate psychology studentsvisual accommodative technologiesvisual attentionvisual distractionsvisual eye tracking

Identifiers

PMID40212307
PMCPMC11983440

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.