ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2026
Top-down motivation both decreases and increases feature interference following a saccade.
Article 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.
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
Spatial attention is rarely static, but instead highly dynamic in real-life. Recent studies have revealed that shifts of attention and eye movements incur consequences for ongoing feature perception, such as systematic feature-binding (swapping and mixing) errors. Here we investigated if these consequences are sensitive to top-down control, such that they could be flexibly mitigated when participants are motivated to improve their performance, or if feature interference reflects a more automatic byproduct of attentional remapping mechanisms following a saccade. In a preregistered experiment, 40 healthy adults reported the color of an item appearing at a pre-cued spatiotopic location. Following the cue, participants made a saccade, and then an array of colored items briefly appeared at the spatiotopic target location, retinotopic nontarget location, and two control nontarget locations. Crucially, across blocks we provided two different levels of performance-contingent reward (monetary incentives for precise spatiotopic target reports) to induce differences in top-down motivation. Compared to baseline lower-reward blocks, during higher performance-contingent reward ("bonus") blocks, participants showed improved general performance and reduced subtle retinotopic mixing errors immediately after the saccade. However, we found the opposite effect on retinotopic swapping errors, with higher reward/motivation associated with increased retinotopic swapping errors early after the saccade, indicating that retinotopic swapping errors may reflect a structural limitation of the attentional remapping process. Overall, these results uncover effects of motivation on distinct attentional mechanisms underlying spatial remapping across saccades, and provide novel insights into the role of top-down control in dynamic spatial attention and visual perception more generally.
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.