Cited by 150Visual perception and processing mechanismsVisual Attention and Saliency DetectionMemory Processes and Influences

Awareness in contextual cuing with extended and concurrent explicit tests

Open access
Smyth, Andrea C., Shanks, David R.·2008·Memory & Cognition

Abstract

The term contextual cuing refers to improved visual search performance with repeated exposure to a configuration of objects. Participants use predictive cues-derived from learned associations between target locations and the spatial arrangement of the surrounding distractors in a configuration--to efficiently guide search behavior. Researchers have claimed that contextual cuing can occur implicitly. The present experiments examined two explicit measures--generation and recognition. In Experiment 1, we found that contextual cuing information was consciously retrievable when the number of trials used in a generation test was increased, and the results also suggested that the shorter tests that were used previously were not statistically powerful enough to detect a true awareness effect. In Experiment 2, concurrent implicit and explicit (generation and recognition) tests were employed. At a group level, learning did not precede awareness. Although contextual cuing was evident in participants who were selected post hoc as having no explicit awareness, and for specific configurations that did not support awareness, we argue that awareness may nevertheless be a necessary concomitant of contextual cuing. These results demonstrate that contextual cuing knowledge is accessible to awareness.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3758/mc.36.2.403

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • When targets appeared in contextual configurations in which they had been selected before, they were more quickly selected than when they appeared in configurations in which they had never been selected, even though participants seemed unaware of the contextual relationships.

    “They showed that when targets appeared in contextual configurations in which they had been selected before, they were more quickly selected than when they appeared in configurations in which they had never been selected—even though participants seemed to be unaware of the contextual relationships (but see Smyth & Shanks, 2008).”

    From Selection history: How reward modulates selectivity of visual attention. (2018) · cites this paper as Smyth & Shanks, 2008

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Smyth, A. C., & Shanks, D. R.
Affiliations
University College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Smyth, Andrea C.
Venue
Memory & Cognition
Published
2008-03
Volume
36
Issue
2
Pages
403-415
ISSN
  • 0090-502X (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-5946
OpenAlex
W1974813962
Cited by
150
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 11
FWCI
5.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Memory & Cognition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Economic and Social Research Council (RES-538-28-1001)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
Keywords
contextual cuing, awareness, declarative memory, implicit memory, visual search, recognition memory, predictive cues, spatial learning, statistical power
MeSH terms
Adult, Association Learning, Awareness, Cues, Discrimination Learning, Female, Field Dependence-Independence, Humans, Male, Orientation, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Reaction Time, Mental Recall

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