Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Cause and Effect

Cause and Effect

While variables are sometimes correlated because one does cause the other, it could also be that some other factor, a confounding variable, is actually causing the systematic movement in our variables of interest. For instance, as sales in ice cream increase, so does the overall rate of crime. Is it possible that indulging in your favorite flavor of ice cream could send you on a crime spree? Or, after committing crime do you think you might decide to treat yourself to a cone?

Bias

Bias

Bias refers to any tendency that prevents a question from being considered unprejudiced. In research, bias occurs when one outcome or answer is selected or encouraged over others in sampling or testing. Bias can occur during any research phase, including study design, data collection, analysis, and publication.
In statistics, a sampling bias is created when a sample is collected from a population, and some members of the population are not as likely to be chosen as others (remember, each member...

The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic

The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic

In order to make good decisions, we use our knowledge and our reasoning. Often, this knowledge and reasoning is sound and solid. However, sometimes, we are swayed by biases or by others manipulating a situation. For example, let’s say you and three friends wanted to rent a house and had a combined target budget of $1,600. The realtor shows you only very run-down houses for $1,600 and then shows you a very nice house for $2,000. Might you ask each person to pay more in rent to get the $2,000...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

Neurophysiological mechanisms of optimized graphomotor performance in biscriptuals.

Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)·2026

Same author

Functional properties of the handwriting brain network: Effects of motor sequence and spatial adaptation constraints.

Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior·2026

Same author

Lost in translation: Mental fatigue induced by simultaneous interpreting impairs working memory and modulates pre-ejection period.

Acta psychologica·2026

Same author

The influence of fine motor skills and executive functions on automatized handwriting.

Cognitive neuropsychology·2025

Same author

The sulcal patterns of the occipito-temporal and anterior cingulate cortices influence reading and writing in children and adults.

Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991)·2025

Same author

Subthalamic Activity Is Associated With Proactive Inhibition in Parkinson's Disease Patients.

The European journal of neuroscience·2025

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 11, 2026

Investigating the Deployment of Visual Attention Before Accurate and Averaging Saccades via Eye Tracking and Assessment of Visual Sensitivity

Investigating the Deployment of Visual Attention Before Accurate and Averaging Saccades via Eye Tracking and Assessment of Visual Sensitivity

Published on: March 18, 2019

Cueing method biases in visual detection studies.

Magali Jaffard¹, Abdelrhani Benraiss, Marieke Longcamp

¹Laboratoire Performance Motricité et Cognition, MSHS, 99 avenue du Recteur Pineau, 86000 Poitiers, France.

|September 27, 2007

Summary

This study reveals that common attention cueing tasks may produce misleading results. Mixed-block designs, often used in attention research, can create biases due to competing automatic motor activation and response inhibition processes.

More Related Videos

A Gaze-Contingent Display Framework for Perceptual Learning Research with Simulated Central Vision Loss

A Gaze-Contingent Display Framework for Perceptual Learning Research with Simulated Central Vision Loss

Published on: April 11, 2025

Measuring Attention and Visual Processing Speed by Model-based Analysis of Temporal-order Judgments

Measuring Attention and Visual Processing Speed by Model-based Analysis of Temporal-order Judgments

Published on: January 23, 2017

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 11, 2026

Investigating the Deployment of Visual Attention Before Accurate and Averaging Saccades via Eye Tracking and Assessment of Visual Sensitivity

Investigating the Deployment of Visual Attention Before Accurate and Averaging Saccades via Eye Tracking and Assessment of Visual Sensitivity

Published on: March 18, 2019

A Gaze-Contingent Display Framework for Perceptual Learning Research with Simulated Central Vision Loss

A Gaze-Contingent Display Framework for Perceptual Learning Research with Simulated Central Vision Loss

Published on: April 11, 2025

Measuring Attention and Visual Processing Speed by Model-based Analysis of Temporal-order Judgments

Measuring Attention and Visual Processing Speed by Model-based Analysis of Temporal-order Judgments

Published on: January 23, 2017

Area of Science:

Cognitive Psychology
Neuroscience
Experimental Psychology

Background:

Attention research frequently employs cueing tasks to evaluate how advance information influences target processing.
The reliability of these classical cueing paradigms, particularly under mixed-block protocols, has been questioned.

Purpose of the Study:

To investigate the impact of "mixed-block" versus "pure-block" protocols on the validity of attention cueing tasks.
To determine if observed cueing effects in mixed-block designs are truly attentional or methodological artifacts.

Main Methods:

Utilized a simple visual detection task with neutral cues.
Compared behavioral and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data from mixed-block and pure-block experimental designs.

Main Results:

Cueing tasks involve competing processes: automatic motor activation by the cue and proactive response inhibition.
This competition significantly alters the reaction time baseline in mixed-block designs, potentially masking or mimicking attentional effects.
Proactive inhibition persists until target presentation in mixed-block protocols, preventing accurate measurement of cueing effects.

Conclusions:

Mixed-block cueing designs may introduce biases, leading to the misinterpretation of data as attentional effects.
The findings suggest that effects observed in mixed-block protocols might be artifacts rather than genuine attentional phenomena.
A reevaluation of the theoretical frameworks and baseline controls for interpreting cueing effects is warranted.