Unequal allocation of overt and covert attention in multiple object tracking

In many real-life contexts, where objects are moving around, we are often required to allocate our attention unequally between targets or regions of different importance. However, typical multiple object tracking (MOT) tasks, primarily investigate equal attention allocation as the likelihood of each target being probed is the same. In two experiments, we investigated whether participants can allocate attention unequally across regions of the visual field, using a MOT task where two regions were probed with either a high and low or with equal priority. Experiment 1 showed that for high-priority regions, accuracy (for direction of heading judgments) improved, and participants had more frequent and longer fixations in that region compared with a low-priority region. Experiment 2 showed that eye movements were functional in that they slightly improved accuracy when participants could freely move their eyes compared with when they had to centrally fixate. Replicating Experiment 1, we found better tracking performance for high compared with low-priority regions, in both the free and fixed viewing conditions, but the benefit was greater for the free viewing condition. Although unequal attention allocation is possible without eye movements, eye movements seem to improve tracking ability, presumably by allowing participants to fixate more in the high-priority region and get a better, foveal view of the objects. These findings can help us better understand how observers in real-life settings (e.g., CCTV monitoring, driving) can use their limited attentional capacity to allocate their attention unequally in a demand-based manner across different tracking regions

Slightly perturbing the arm influences choices between multiple targets

We constantly make choices about how to interact with objects in the environment. Do we immediately consider changes in our posture when making such choices? To find out, we examined whether motion in the background, which is known to influence the trajectory of goal-directed hand movements, influences participants’ choices when suddenly faced with two options. The participants’ task was to tap on as many sequentially presented targets as possible within 90 seconds. Sometime after a new target appeared, it split into two targets and participants had to choose which of them to hit. Shortly before the split, the background moved in a way that was expected to result in the finger shifting slightly towards one of the two new targets. We examined whether such shifts influenced the choice between the two targets. The moving background influenced the finger movements in the expected manner: participants moved in the direction of the background motion. It also influenced the choice that participants made between the two targets: participants more frequently chose the target in the direction of the background motion. There was a positive correlation across participants between the magnitude of the response to background motion and the bias to choose the target in the direction of such motion. Thus, people consider sudden changes in their posture when choosing between different movement options

Early parenting interventions to prevent internalising problems in children and adolescents: a global systematic review and network meta-analysis

QUESTION: We compared the effectiveness of different types of parenting interventions based on an a priori taxonomy, and the impact of waitlists versus treatment as usual (TAU), in reducing child internalising problems. STUDY SELECTION AND ANALYSIS: We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) until 1 October 2022 that investigated parenting interventions with children younger than 4 years. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: studies with children born preterm, with intellectual disabilities, or families receiving support for current abuse, neglect, and substance misuse. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis framework. We used random-effects network meta-analysis to estimate standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% credible intervals (CrIs). FINDINGS: Of 20 520 citations identified, 59 RCTs (18 349 participants) were eligible for the network meta-analysis. Parenting interventions focusing on the dyadic relationship (SMD: -0.26, 95% CrI: -0.43 to -0.08) and those with mixed focus (-0.09, -0.17 to -0.02) were more effective in reducing internalising problems than TAU at the first time point available. All interventions were more effective than waitlist, which increased the risk of internalising problems compared with TAU (0.36, 0.19 to 0.52). All effects attenuated at later follow-ups. Most studies were rated as with 'high risk' or 'some concerns' using the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool V.2. There was no strong evidence of effect modification by theoretically informed components or modifiers. CONCLUSIONS: We found preliminary evidence that relationship-focused and mixed parenting interventions were effective in reducing child internalising problems, and the waitlist comparator increased internalising problems with implications for waiting times between referral and support. Considering the high risk of bias of most studies included, the findings from this meta-analysis should be interpreted with caution. PROSPERO registration number CRD42020172251

Early parenting interventions to prevent internalising problems in children and adolescents: a global systematic review and network meta-analysis

Question: We compared the effectiveness of different types of parenting interventions based on an a priori taxonomy, and the impact of waitlists versus treatment as usual (TAU), in reducing child internalising problems. Study selection and analysis: We conducted a systematic review and network meta‐ analysis of published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) until 1 October 2022 that investigated parenting interventions with children younger than 4 years. Exclusion criteria: studies with children born preterm, with intellectual disabilities, or families receiving support for current abuse, neglect, and substance misuse. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the Confidence in Network Meta‐ Analysis framework. We used random‐ effects network meta‐ analysis to estimate standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% credible intervals (CrIs). Findings: Of 20 520 citations identified, 59 RCTs (18 349 participants) were eligible for the network meta‐ analysis. Parenting interventions focusing on the dyadic relationship (SMD: −0.26, 95% CrI: −0.43 to −0.08) and those with mixed focus (−0.09, –0.17 to −0.02) were more effective in reducing internalising problems than TAU at the first time point available. All interventions were more effective than waitlist, which increased the risk of internalising problems compared with TAU (0.36, 0.19 to 0.52). All effects attenuated at later follow‐ ups. Most studies were rated as with ’high risk’ or ’some concerns’ using the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool V.2. There was no strong evidence of effect modification by theoretically informed components or modifiers. Conclusions: We found preliminary evidence that relationship‐ focused and mixed parenting interventions were effective in reducing child internalising problems, and the waitlist comparator increased internalising problems with implications for waiting times between referral and support. Considering the high risk of bias of most studies included, the findings from this meta‐ analysis should be interpreted with caution. PROSPERO registration number CRD42020172251

Graded prioritisation of targets in search: reward diminishes the low prevalence effect

Abstract In many real-life contexts, observers are required to search for targets that are rarely present (e.g. tumours in X-rays; dangerous items in airport security screenings). Despite the rarity of these items, they are of enormous importance for the health and safety of the public, yet they are easily missed during visual search. This is referred to as the prevalence effect. In the current series of experiments, we investigate whether unequal reward can modulate the prevalence effect, in a multiple target search task. Having first established the impact of prevalence (Experiment 1) and reward (Experiment 2) on how efficiently participants can find one of several targets in the current paradigm, we then combined the two forms of priority to investigate their interaction. An unequal reward distribution (where lower prevalence items are more rewarded; Experiment 3) was found to diminish the effect of prevalence, compared to an equal reward distribution (Experiment 4) as indicated by faster response times and fewer misses. These findings suggest that when combined with an unequal reward distribution, the low prevalence effect can be diminished

Early parenting interventions to prevent internalising problems in children and adolescents:a global systematic review and network meta-analysis

Question: We compared the effectiveness of different types of parenting interventions based on an a priori taxonomy, and the impact of waitlists versus treatment as usual (TAU), in reducing child internalising problems. Study selection and analysis: We conducted a systematic review and network meta‐ analysis of published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) until 1 October 2022 that investigated parenting interventions with children younger than 4 years. Exclusion criteria: studies with children born preterm, with intellectual disabilities, or families receiving support for current abuse, neglect, and substance misuse. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the Confidence in Network Meta‐ Analysis framework. We used random‐ effects network meta‐ analysis to estimate standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% credible intervals (CrIs). Findings: Of 20 520 citations identified, 59 RCTs (18 349 participants) were eligible for the network meta‐ analysis. Parenting interventions focusing on the dyadic relationship (SMD: −0.26, 95% CrI: −0.43 to −0.08) and those with mixed focus (−0.09, –0.17 to −0.02) were more effective in reducing internalising problems than TAU at the first time point available. All interventions were more effective than waitlist, which increased the risk of internalising problems compared with TAU (0.36, 0.19 to 0.52). All effects attenuated at later follow‐ ups. Most studies were rated as with ’high risk’ or ’some concerns’ using the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool V.2. There was no strong evidence of effect modification by theoretically informed components or modifiers. Conclusions: We found preliminary evidence that relationship‐ focused and mixed parenting interventions were effective in reducing child internalising problems, and the waitlist comparator increased internalising problems with implications for waiting times between referral and support. Considering the high risk of bias of most studies included, the findings from this meta‐ analysis should be interpreted with caution. PROSPERO registration number CRD42020172251