Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41840254›Full record

ReviewPsychonomic bulletin & review2026

Avoiding the dichotomy between endogenous and exogenous attention: Selective attention as an attentional priority map fed by multiple interacting attentional signals.

Bertrand Beffara, Valentin Flaudias, Corentin Gonthier

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Bertrand BeffaraInstitute of Cognitive Science Marc Jeannerod, CNRS, UMR 5229, 69500, Bron, France. bertrand.beffara@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9288-3597
Valentin FlaudiasUniversité Clermont Auvergne (UCA), LAPSCO, CNRS, 34 Avenue Carnot, UMR 6024, 63037, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Corentin GonthierNantes Université, Univ Angers, Laboratoire de psychologie des Pays de la Loire, LPPL, UR 4638, F-44000, Nantes, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For more than 40 years, selective attention has been summarized as operating through two distinct mechanisms: a bottom-up mechanism (exogenous attention, driving attentional selection based on stimulus features such as salience) and a top-down mechanism (endogenous attention, driving attentional selection based on goal-related information). This dichotomy is still an integral part of discourse on selective attention, despite contemporary research clearly showing that this is an oversimplification. In the present theoretical synthesis, we summarize nine key lines of arguments showing that exogenous and endogenous attention are not cleanly distinguishable in terms of either neurocognitive or computational mechanisms, and that they do not exhaustively represent the types of attentional signals that contribute to attentional selection. We then outline how the framework of priority maps can help better describe the combined influence of salience-based, goal-based, and other stimulus- and observer-related sources of attentional bias. In this view, selective attention is more usefully summarized in the form of various concurrent attentional signals being integrated in a priority map, which represents attentional weights at different space locations. This framework also helps conceptualize possible types of interactions between attentional signals, including early and late interactions during the course of attentional processing.

Indexed as

AttentionHumansAttentional signalsBiased competitionEndogenous attentionExogenous attentionPriority mapsSelective attention

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.