ArticlePsychological research2026
Measuring conscious perception interferes with the allocation of attention to distractors.
Article in Psychological research, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A topic of interest in the attention capture literature is the interaction between attention and conscious perception. Many studies have examined whether conscious perception of an irrelevant distracting stimulus is necessary for it to capture attention. One approach involves using measures that require subjects to rate their perceived clarity of a distractor on every trial. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the assessment of conscious perception of the distractor using such measures impacts the allocation of attention to the distractor. We investigated whether measuring conscious perception of a distractor increases its relevance to the observer, causing attention to be allocated to the distractor voluntarily rather than captured involuntarily. We examined this possibility in four experiments in which subjects completed a Rapid Serial Visual Presentation (RSVP) task. To determine whether attention is allocated voluntarily to the distractor or captured by it, we measured two effects indicative of attention capture, the contingent capture effect and a spatial distance effect. The results suggest that when conscious perception was measured distractors captured attention irrespective of whether the distractor and target colour matched. However, when conscious perception was not being measured a robust contingent capture effect was consistently observed. Although the effect of the spatial distance manipulation was mixed, we consistently observed a larger attentional blink by target-matching distractors presented at a location far from the focally attended region when conscious perception was measured than when it was not. Thus, we concluded that measuring conscious perception of a distractor interferes with the allocation of attention to the distractor by causing it to be voluntarily attended as though it were task relevant, masking the hallmarks observed when attention is captured. The present findings suggest that previous claims made about the interaction between conscious perception and attention may be premature, necessitating either development of a new measure, or adjustments to existing measures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42189242What 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.