ArticleBehavior research methods2026
Measuring individual differences in the speed of attention using the distractor intrusion task.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Long-term memory speeds encoding, independently of attention.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
How quickly we attend to objects plays an important role in navigating the world, especially in dynamic and rapidly changing environments. Measuring individual differences in attention speed is therefore an important, yet challenging, task. Although reaction times in visual search tasks have often been used as an intuitive proxy of such individual differences, these measures are limited by inconsistent levels of reliability and contamination by non-attentional factors. This study introduces the rate of post-target distractor intrusions (DI) in the rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) paradigm as an alternative method of studying individual differences in the speed of attention. In RSVP, a target is presented for a brief duration and embedded among multiple distractors. DIs are reports of a subsequent distractor rather than the target and have previously been shown to be associated with the speed of attention. The present study explored the reliability and validity of DI rates as a measure of individual differences. In three studies, DI rates showed high internal consistency and test-retest reliability over a year (>.90), even with a short task administration of only about 5 minutes. Moreover, DI rates were associated with measures related to attention speed, but not with unrelated measures of attentional control, reading speed, and attentional blink effects. Taken together, DI rates can serve as a useful tool for research into individual differences in the speed of attention. Links to a downloadable and easily executable DI experiment, as well as a brief discussion of methodological considerations, are provided to facilitate such future research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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 Socratic graph.