Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42021406›Full record

ArticleBMC psychology2026

No evidence for the utility of negative cues in a visual search-based concealed information test.

Tomoya Kawashima, Takashi Kabata

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychology, 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

2 authors.

Tomoya KawashimaDepartment of Psychology and Information Design, College of Media Information, Kanazawa Institute of Technology, 3-1 Yatsukaho, Hakusan, Ishikawa, 924-0838, Japan. kawashima-t@neptune.kanazawa-it.ac.jp.
Takashi KabataScientific Crime Laboratory, Kanagawa Prefectural Police, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.

Funding

JSPS Grant-in-Aid for Early-Career Scientists JP23K17171
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Concealed Information Test (CIT) is a widely used method for detecting whether individuals possess knowledge that they are trying to hide. This is typically assessed via physiological or behavioral indicators, such as reaction time. The present study examined whether inefficient visual search behaviorspecifically, slowing when participants are cued to ignore distractor features — can serve as a behavioral marker of concealed information, reflecting attentional capture and suppression processes. This approach was motivated by previous findings showing that cues associated with task-irrelevant items can impair visual search performance.

methodsExperiment 1 employed a visual search paradigm with distractor cues, based on previous negative cueing studies, to replicate their findings using object-based visual stimuli. Experiments 2 and 3 implemented a visual search–based concealed information test (CIT), in which the memorized and concealed item appeared as a distractor cue in the search display. Reaction times were recorded as the dependent measure.

resultsExperiment 1 confirmed that the use of distractor cues resulted in longer search times, suggesting inefficient visual processing. However, Experiments 2 and 3 revealed no significant differences in search performance between trials with and without concealed cues.

conclusionsAlthough visual search under distractor cueing was inefficient, it did not reliably reflect the presence of concealed information. The results suggest that attention to concealed items may be strategically suppressed or redirected, which undermines their detectability in reaction time-based visual searches. These findings emphasize the importance of incorporating alternative markers, such as eye movements or physiological signals, to enhance CIT sensitivity in future research.

Indexed as

AttentionCuesLie DetectionVisual PerceptionAdultFemaleHumansMalePhotic StimulationReaction TimeYoung AdultAttentionConcealed information testCueing distractorReaction timeVisual search

Identifiers

PMID42021406
PMCPMC13235189

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.