ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2026
Aimed-movement responses and distributional analysis indicate distinctive cognitive control mechanisms in arrow cueing tasks.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recent research on validity sequence effects (VSE) has drawn on conflict task theories to explain the psychological mechanisms underlying the VSE. This study analyzed a confound-minimized arrow cueing task and a prime-probe task using the aimed-movement method, which separates reaction times into initiation time (IT) and movement time (MT). Neutral stimuli were included to isolate the benefit/facilitation (or cost/interference) effects of the cues (or the primes). Distributional analyses showed that significant cueing effect and VSE only appeared in the IT data. In addition, the size of the cueing effect increased with the extension of the response latencies, mainly attributed to the increase in the cost effect by invalid cues. The size of the VSE did not vary at different response latencies and was mainly reflected by the enlarged cueing effect after previous valid cues. In comparison, the size of the congruency effect in the prime-probe task increased with the extension of the response latencies only in the MT data. Like VSE, the observed congruency sequence effect (CSE) appeared at IT data and the size of it did not vary at different response latencies, but the CSE was mainly reflected by the reduced congruency effect after previous incongruent trials. These findings are discussed and compared with literature findings from conflict tasks. The results indicate that the cueing effect of cueing tasks has qualitative difference with the congruency effect of conflict tasks, but the adaptive cognitive mechanisms (i.e., sequence effects) under these tasks are less different with each other.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41483075What 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.