The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
What drives memory-driven attentional capture? The effects of memory type, display type, and search type.
Open accessAbstract
An important question is whether visual attention (the ability to select relevant visual information) and visual working memory (the ability to retain relevant visual information) share the same content representations. Some past research has indicated that they do: Singleton distractors interfered more strongly with a visual search task when they were identical or related to the object held in memory. However, other research has failed to find such effects despite using very similar procedures. The present study, using the same combined working memory and attentional capture paradigm, demonstrates which factors do (varied mapping, low stimulus energy) and which factors do not (exact type of visual memory method used, difficult nature of search, heterogeneity of displays, and instruction) contribute to this discrepancy.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Neural Mechanisms of Selective Visual Attention
Desimone, R., & Duncan, J. (1995) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev.ne.18.030195.001205 · Cited by 8,388
The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity
Cowan, N. (2001) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x01003922 · Cited by 6,779
Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search, and attention.
Schneider, W., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.1.1 · Cited by 5,902
Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings
Folk, C. L., Remington, R. W., & Johnston, J. C. (1992) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance · doi:10.1037/0096-1523.18.4.1030 · Cited by 2,487
Mechanisms of visual attention in the human cortex
Ungerleider, S. K. A. L. G. (2000) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.23.1.315 · Cited by 2,159
Load Theory of Selective Attention and Cognitive Control
Lavie, N., Hirst, A., de Fockert, J. W., & Viding, E. (2004) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/0096-3445.133.3.339 · Cited by 1,812
Perceptual selectivity for color and form
Theeuwes, J. (1992) · Perception & Psychophysics · doi:10.3758/bf03211656 · Cited by 1,649
Overlapping mechanisms of attention and spatial working memory
Awh, E., & Jonides, J. (2001) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/s1364-6613(00)01593-x · Cited by 1,229
Engle, R. W., Kane, M. J., & Tuholski, S. W. (1999) · Models of Working Memory · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139174909.007 · Cited by 1,195
Interactions between attention and working memory
Awh, E., Vogel, E. K., & Oh, S.-H. (2006) · Neuroscience · doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2005.08.023 · Cited by 883
Cited by
Different states in visual working memory: when it guides attention and when it does not
Olivers, C. N. L., Peters, J., Houtkamp, R., & Roelfsema, P. R. (2011) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2011.05.004 · Cited by 678
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Olivers, C. N. L.
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance
- Published
- 2009
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1275-1291
- ISSN
- 0096-1523 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1277
- OpenAlex
- W2100207218
- Cited by
- 192
- References
- 11
- FWCI
- 7.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: What drives memory-driven attentional capture? The effects of memory type, display type, and search type. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/a0013896
- The paper
- Olivers, C. N. L. (2009). What drives memory-driven attentional capture? The effects of memory type, display type, and search type. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013896
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
