ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2026
Parallel or clump-wise serial? A reinterpretation of feature-search mode.
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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A central debate in visual attention concerns whether selection is guided primarily by top- down control or by bottom-up salience. In the additional singleton task, the absence of attentional capture by a distractor is often attributed to the adoption of feature-search mode. An alternative account proposes that these displays instead partly induce serial search, which naturally limits distractor interference. The present study tested this by linking two diagnostics of search dynamics, set size effects and two target compatibility, within the same paradigm. Participants searched for a predefined target among heterogeneous non-targets while set size and the presence of a salient color singleton distractor were manipulated. Across two experiments, search showed reliable display size effects and responses were faster when two targets were present than when only one target was present. At larger display sizes no target compatibility effect was observed. At the same time the distractor did not capture attention and instead produced a distractor benefit. Together, these findings indicate that displays commonly assumed to induce the feature-search mode partly require serial selection. The absence of attentional capture therefore reflects sequential serial processing rather than top-down suppression. OPEN PRACTICES STATEMENT: All experiment code, analysis code, and anonymized trial-level participant data are available via the Open Science Framework at: osf.io/g6avc. None of the experiments herein were preregistered.
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.