ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2026
Dynamics of the attentional blink in preverbal infants.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In the first months postterm, human infants are traditionally viewed as passive to their environment, unable to focus or sustain attention on specific objects. Here, we asked whether 4-mo-old infants could engage their attention strongly enough in a visual task to block the perception of a subsequent interesting stimulus-a phenomenon known as attentional blink, which in adults reflects a serial processing bottleneck for accessing a central workspace. We presented three successive visual events: a central teddy bear (T1) followed by a lateralized face and scrambled face (T2) at varying stimulus onset asynchrony (SOAs: 400, 800, and 1,200 ms), then the same face reappeared after 1,600 ms (T3). We monitored saccades toward the face, pupil size, and electroencephalic (EEG) responses to the flickering background. Our behavioral and EEG results showed that infants missed the lateralized face at the shortest SOA (400 ms). At 800 ms, detection occurred only when the face appeared in the left hemifield, while detection in the right hemifield required 1,200 ms, suggesting a hemispheric asymmetry in face processing. Furthermore, at SOAs where T2 should be visible, a trial-by-trial metric based on event-related variability revealed that the depth of attentional engagement to T1 predicted access to T2, despite identical visual input. These findings support the presence of a global workspace in early infancy, though with slower dynamics.
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.