Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42460433›Full record

ArticleComputational brain & behavior2024

Distracted by Previous Experience: Integrating Selection History, Current Task Demands and Saliency in an Algorithmic Model.

Neda Meibodi, Hossein Abbasi, Anna Schubö, Dominik Endres

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Computational brain & behavior, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

4 authors.

Neda MeibodiDepartment of Psychology, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Gutenbergstraße 18, Marburg, 35037 Hessen Germany.
Hossein AbbasiDepartment of Psychology, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Gutenbergstraße 18, Marburg, 35037 Hessen Germany.
Anna SchuböDepartment of Psychology, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Gutenbergstraße 18, Marburg, 35037 Hessen Germany.
Dominik EndresDepartment of Psychology, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Gutenbergstraße 18, Marburg, 35037 Hessen Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Attention can be biased by previous learning and experience. We present an algorithmic-level model of this selection history bias in visual attention that predicts quantitatively how stimulus-driven processes, goal-driven control and selection history compete to control attention. In the model, the output of saliency maps as stimulus-driven guidance interacts with a history map that encodes learning effects and a goal-driven task control to prioritize visual features. The model works on coded features rather than image pixels which is common in many traditional saliency models. We test the model on a reaction time (RT) data from a psychophysical experiment. The model accurately predicts parameters of reaction time distributions from an integrated priority map that is comprised of an optimal, weighted combination of separate maps. Analysis of the weights confirms selection history effects on attention guidance. The model is able to capture individual differences between participants' RTs and response probabilities per group. Moreover, we demonstrate that a model with a reduced set of maps performs worse, indicating that integrating history, saliency and task information are required for a quantitative description of human attention. Besides, we show that adding intertrial effect to the model (as another lingering bias) improves the model's predictive performance.

Indexed as

Ex-Gaussian distributionFeature integrated theoryIntegrated priority mapSelection historySelf-information maximizationVisual attention modeling

Identifiers

PMID42460433
PMCPMC13298629

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.