English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

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.

What drives memory-driven attentional capture? The effects of memory type, display type, and search type.