ArticleJournal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition2026
Cue-driven attentional guidance nearly eliminates salience effects in working memory.
Article in Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Working memory has a limited capacity, and it is therefore crucial to carefully control what information is stored in working memory. It has been suggested that there is a fundamental limitation in the control of working memory in that salient objects will automatically receive enhanced representations. These accounts propose that salient objects automatically compete within working memory, and this competition cannot be prevented by preemptive attentional orienting. The present study questions this claim. Specifically, we investigate a prior study claiming that attentional cueing is insufficient to eliminate salience effects in working memory recall (Constant & Kerzel, 2025). We propose that these findings occurred because participants were not sufficiently encouraged to attend to the cues in these studies. Across two experiments, we improve attentional orienting to the cues by strengthening their predictiveness and by increasing their duration. We find that attentional orienting can completely prevent salience effects on working memory recall, contrary to the conclusions of the original studies. These findings favor a more flexible account of working memory, whereby top-down control can be used to reduce the influence of salience on memory representations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).
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.