Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42625096›Full record

ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2026

Periodic performance feedback and cognitive ability interactively mitigate the vigilance decrement.

Matthew K Robison, Reyes Flores, Benjamin Rudd

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Matthew K RobisonDepartment of Psychology, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN, USA. mrobison@nd.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3565-6002
Reyes FloresDepartment of Psychology, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, USA.
Benjamin RuddDepartment of Psychology, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.

Funding

Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences W911NF-23-1-0300Office of Naval Research N00014-25-1-2305U.S. Naval Research Laboratory N00173-22-2-C006
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We investigated the effects of periodic performance feedback across three experiments. In Experiment 1, participants were assigned to either a feedback condition, in which there was periodic performance feedback (n = 302), or to a control condition, which received no feedback (n = 293). Whereas the control condition demonstrated a large vigilance decrement, even over a brief task duration, participants in the feedback condition performed both better overall and demonstrated a significantly shallower decrement. Experiment 2 (n = 103) was a preregistered replication with an extended task duration, and we directly replicated the findings. Experiment 3 was another preregistered experiment (n = 283), in which we examined three conditions with the extended duration: feedback for the entire task, feedback for only the first half of the task, and no feedback for the entire duration. The conditions did not differ in performance. However, in a post hoc cross-experimental analysis, we discovered significant moderation of the feedback effect via fluid intelligence. The findings have implications for how we view vigilance as a cognitive construct, why it typically wanes with time, and how it may be stabilized. All data and materials are publicly available on the Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/fzd2h/ ).

Indexed as

ArousalAttentionFeedback, PsychologicalIntelligencePsychomotor PerformanceAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMalePattern Recognition, VisualReaction TimeYoung AdultVigilance; Sustained attention; Feedback

Identifiers

PMID42625096
PMCPMC13493477

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.