ArticlePsychological research2025
Attention on demand: Do people strategically heighten control when distraction is expected but rare?
Article in Psychological research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The puzzle of profitless pre-cues.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePeople reliably relax cognitive control in response to pre-cues signaling a low likelihood of distraction (e.g., mostly congruent lists). However, there is limited evidence that people heighten control when pre-cued that distraction is likely (e.g., mostly incongruent lists). One possible explanation for this asymmetry pertains to floor effects in mostly incongruent lists, where interference is minimal even without pre-cues. Hence, we examined whether individuals would heighten control in mostly congruent lists-where control is typically relaxed-when given pre-cues and novel instructions emphasizing the difficulty posed by infrequent but disruptive incongruent trials.
methodIn Experiments 1a and 1b, participants performed a color-word Stroop task with mostly congruent and mostly incongruent lists and encountered informative or uninformative pre-cues before each list. Instructions highlighted the difficulty of performing well in mostly congruent lists (1a) or mostly incongruent lists (1b). In Experiment 2, we additionally tested whether forming implementation intentions would enhance pre-cue use and facilitate on-demand control.
resultsComparisons across Experiments 1a and 1b provided modest evidence that participants heightened control in response to pre-cues in mostly congruent lists. Experiment 2 found no additional benefit from implementation intentions.
conclusionThese findings suggest that perhaps individuals can heighten control on demand when distraction is infrequent but nonetheless disruptive, which may be critical given the potential to be caught off-guard in such conditions. However, other factors beyond list composition seem to contribute to the limited evidence of an on-demand heightening of control.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40448723What 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.