↓ Skip to main content

Task-relevant information is prioritized in spatiotemporal contextual cueing

Overview of attention for article published in Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
Title
Task-relevant information is prioritized in spatiotemporal contextual cueing
Published in
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, August 2016
DOI 10.3758/s13414-016-1198-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yoko Higuchi, Yoshiyuki Ueda, Hirokazu Ogawa, Jun Saiki

Abstract

Implicit learning of visual contexts facilitates search performance-a phenomenon known as contextual cueing; however, little is known about contextual cueing under situations in which multidimensional regularities exist simultaneously. In everyday vision, different information, such as object identity and location, appears simultaneously and interacts with each other. We tested the hypothesis that, in contextual cueing, when multiple regularities are present, the regularities that are most relevant to our behavioral goals would be prioritized. Previous studies of contextual cueing have commonly used the visual search paradigm. However, this paradigm is not suitable for directing participants' attention to a particular regularity. Therefore, we developed a new paradigm, the "spatiotemporal contextual cueing paradigm," and manipulated task-relevant and task-irrelevant regularities. In four experiments, we demonstrated that task-relevant regularities were more responsible for search facilitation than task-irrelevant regularities. This finding suggests our visual behavior is focused on regularities that are relevant to our current goal.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 16%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Researcher 3 7%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 10 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 23 53%
Neuroscience 3 7%
Computer Science 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Mathematics 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 12 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 August 2016.
All research outputs
#5,358,864
of 25,848,323 outputs
Outputs from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#285
of 2,393 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,048
of 351,250 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#2
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,848,323 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,393 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 351,250 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.