ArticleeNeuro2025
No Selective Attentional Shift despite Prefrontal Activation during a Working-Memory Task with Unconscious Stimuli.
Article in eNeuro, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Progress in pain mechanisms and management.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026Review
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
A key process for successful working memory is to prioritize task-relevant information over distraction, i.e., to control attentional deployment. Here we investigate to what extent attentional control during a delayed match-to-sample task can be achieved when to-be-remembered items were presented unconsciously together with distracting information and with a prestimulus cue that indicated whether the target was likely to appear on the left or right side of the screen. This expectation was sometimes violated (20% of trials), requiring reorienting of attention to successfully solve the task. Moreover, the cue was uninformative of the exact location of the target, which could appear on the top, middle, or bottom part of the screen. Participants performed better than chance on unconscious trials only when the cue correctly indicated target side, suggesting an inability to reorient attention when the cues were invalid. Neural activity (fMRI BOLD signal change) in medial and lateral prefrontal cortex was significant for unconscious valid-cue trials and remained significant for invalid-cue trials only in the lateral prefrontal cortex, although neither region was significantly modulated by cue validity. Parietal regions did not show significant activation for valid or invalid unconscious stimuli. Thus, even though activity in brain regions associated with cognitive control reached significant levels for unconscious stimuli, there was no evidence for adaptive deployment of selective attention based on unconscious information, which was the case for conscious stimuli. The ability to control attentional deployment appears to differ between conscious and unconscious working memory.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.