ArticleMemory & cognition2026
Two routes to a target: Visual priming for direct and indirect attentional sets.
Article in Memory & cognition, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To find an item of interest among candidate objects we are directed by attentional sets that reflect our expectations and intentions and may also vary by whether items should be attended or ignored. We investigated how different attentional sets influence target search and the effect of prior experience on these attentional sets. Our participants had to identify a target object given a set of objects that either contained the target itself (direct attentional set) or contained only cues that defined the target by exclusion (indirect attentional set). We found that response times were significantly slower for indirect attentional sets and when sets were mixed within blocks. To analyze the impact of attentional sets on priming, we fitted behavioral time series using multiple dynamic ideal observer models based on a first-order memory mechanism with three consecutive stages: set identification (direct vs. indirect), target identification (based on set cues), and response. The different models involved different assumptions about each stage, and we compared them via information criterion to identify mechanisms that consistently lead to good expected out-of-sample performance. We found strong repetition priming when both set and target were repeated. For direct attentional set, repetition priming was consistent with a first-order memory mechanism that tracks objects and colors likely connected to feature-specific neural mechanisms and frontoparietal attention network. In contrast, the processing of indirect attentional sets relies on qualitatively different mechanisms and search strategies than conventional visual search, likely related to neural networks involved in task switching and generation of attentional set.
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.