ArticleJournal of vision2026
Temporal dynamics of adapting to novel contexts during the generalization of learned spatial suppression.
Article in Journal of vision, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The spatial suppression of a high-probability distractor location (HPDL) acquired through statistical learning critically reduces its attentional priority. The present study conducted four experiments to systematically investigate the mechanisms underlying how this learned suppression generalizes to novel tasks. Specifically, we focused on how generalization is influenced by the priority-enhancing attentional capture of a salient target and the competing demands of a newly introduced suppression process. Following training, Experiments 1 and 2 employed a salient color singleton target to test attentional capture. Experiment 1 reused training stimuli, whereas Experiment 2 introduced novel shapes to determine if the capture effect of novel stimuli would completely override the learned suppression. Experiment 3 introduced a new suppression process to evaluate the impact of competing suppression demands. Finally, Experiment 4 utilized a feature search paradigm as a test task devoid of color singletons to eliminate these interfering factors. The results revealed that the intense capture effect of novel stimuli in Experiment 2 completely masked the generalization. Furthermore, sliding window analyses in Experiments 1 and 3 uncovered a dynamic process where generalization only manifested during the middle of the test phase, indicating a competition between these newly introduced factors and the previously acquired suppression. Conversely, eliminating all interference in Experiment 4 yielded a highly stable and persistent generalization of the HPDL suppression. These findings demonstrate that novel interfering factors drive a dynamic adjustment of the HPDL weight within the priority map, revealing the highly flexible and adaptive nature of human attentional control.
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.