The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Modulating Irrelevant Motion Perception by Varying Attentional Load in an Unrelated Task
Abstract
Lavie's theory of attention proposes that the processing load in a relevant task determines the extent to which irrelevant distractors are processed. This theory was tested by asking participants in a study to perform linguistic tasks of low or high load while ignoring irrelevant visual motion in the periphery of the display. Although task and distractor were unrelated, both functional imaging of motion-related activity in cortical area V5 and psychophysical measures of the motion aftereffect showed reduced motion processing during high load in the linguistic task. These findings fulfill the prediction that perception of irrelevant distractors depends on the relevant processing load.
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
Broadbent, D. E. (1958) · doi:10.1037/10037-000 · Cited by 4,337
Attentional modulation of visual motion processing in cortical areas MT and MST
Treue, S., & Maunsell, J. H. R. (1996) · Nature · doi:10.1038/382539a0 · Cited by 1,025
Perceptual load as a major determinant of the locus of selection in visual attention
Lavie, N., & Tsal, Y. (1994) · Perception & Psychophysics · doi:10.3758/bf03213897 · Cited by 870
Visual activity in area V2 during reversible inactivation of area 17 in the macaque monkey
Girard, P., & Bullier, J. (1989) · Journal of Neurophysiology · doi:10.1152/jn.1989.62.6.1287 · Cited by 179
Cited by
Imaging Cognition II: An Empirical Review of 275 PET and fMRI Studies
Cabeza, R., & Nyberg, L. (2000) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/08989290051137585 · Cited by 3,598
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
Distracted and confused? Selective attention under load
Lavie, N. (2005) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2004.12.004 · Cited by 2,102
Self-citationLoad 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
Self-citationA taxonomy of external and internal attention.
Chun, M. M., Golomb, J. D., & Turk-Browne, N. B. (2011) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100427 · Cited by 1,472
Metadata
- Authors
- Rees, G., Frith, C. D., & Lavie, N.
- Venue
- Science
- Published
- 1997-11-28
- Volume
- 278
- Issue
- 5343
- Pages
- 1616-1619
- ISSN
- 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
- 1095-9203
- OpenAlex
- W2076972670
- Cited by
- 581
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 9.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
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.
