ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2026
Perceptual distraction causes attentional but outdated information to intrude into working memory.
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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Previous studies have demonstrated that visual distraction caused by salient distractors disturbs the attentional filtering of task-irrelevant information into working memory (WM), which is formulated as the filter disruption theory. More recently, a distinct category of information has been proposed, termed attended but outdated information, which undergoes a secondary selection by WM that is distinct from initial attentional filtering. In the present study, we investigated whether dynamic distraction by salient stimuli modulates the memory selection of such attended yet outdated information. We employed a combined WM/visual search task in which participants were required to maintain the location of a uniquely colored square while performing a visual search task that involved a memory-irrelevant color feature. One of the nontarget memory items was associated with a salient distractor on half of the trials. The results showed that neither the memory target color nor the non-target color produced memory-driven attentional capture under the salient distractor-absent condition, even on trials with the shortest reaction times (RTs). Importantly, the color of the memory target was incidentally encoded into WM and subsequently elicited attentional capture during visual search under the salient distractor-present condition. Further analysis of the vincentized cumulative RT distribution indicated that such incidental encoding of attended but outdated information occurred in trials with longer RTs. These findings provide novel evidence that perceptual distraction can disrupt the filter-gating WM encoding, allowing attended but outdated information to intrude into WM and capture attention. This advances our understanding of the dynamic interplay between WM and attentional control.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41984385What 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.