ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2025
Action planning can override exogenous cueing effects.
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.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Action planning can bias the distribution of attention toward the anticipated consequences of the action. Human performance could be facilitated in processing stimuli appearing in locations congruent with the planned action and subsequently held in spatial working memory. This suggests that action planning has the capacity to endogenously orient attention, but this has yet to be formally investigated. In the current study, we examined whether the endogenous nature of action planning could affect exogenous attention capture. Using a virtual three-dimensional (3D) environment, participants underwent simulated driving while presented with a modified cue-target paradigm. Action planning was prompted before (Experiment 1) or during cue presentation (Experiment 2) by requiring participants to perform a lane change following their localization response at the peripheral target onset. The results showed that traditional exogenous cueing effects (inhibition of return; IOR) were revealed when action planning was not required. However, when action planning was required, the IOR effect was diminished at the action-relevant location but remained present at the action-irrelevant location. In addition, we tested that our results were not merely the effect of an induced working memory load before making the lane change (Experiment 3) and that action planning endogenously oriented attention in the absence of any exogenous cueing manipulations (Experiment 4). Collectively, these findings suggest that the endogenous shifting of attention that results from planned actions can impact the effect of exogenous orienting in dynamic stimulus interactions. Future research should continue to examine the interplay between endogenous and exogenous attention in ecologically valid settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40474048What 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.