ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2026
Low prevalence targets are primarily missed due to mind wandering.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The impact of target prevalence (the proportion of trials in which a target appears) has been widely studied within visual search. The low prevalence effect is the finding that rare targets are often missed. Mind wandering, where one's attention drifts away from a primary goal, impairs performance across various tasks, but its influence in low-prevalence search remains unclear. We recruited 60 participants from the general population and examined their mind-wandering rates as they searched for either low- (10%) or high- (50%) prevalence targets. When participants were engaged in mind wandering, response accuracy was reduced and target-absent response times increased. Low-prevalence targets were missed more than high-prevalence targets, but to our surprise, we discovered that most of the low-prevalence effect could be attributed to mind wandering in the majority our analyses. This marks a substantial shift in our understanding of the prevalence effect.
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.