Fitts’s Law in a Selective Reaching Task: The Proximity-to-Hand Effect of Action-Centered Attention Revisited
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The "proximity-to-hand" effect refers to the finding that distractors between the home position and the target cause more interference in a selective reaching movement than distractors farther from the home position. Based largely on the proximity-to-hand effect, Tipper, Lortie, and Baylis (1992) proposed that attention is distributed in an action-centered framework such that the interference caused by a specific stimulus depends on the action. The current experiments sought to determine if there is an attentional preference for stimuli closer to home or for stimuli that activate more efficiently executed actions regardless of the location. Results supported the latter hypothesis in that the greatest interference was observed when the distractor activated an action with a lower index of difficulty than the target, even though that distractor was farther from home than the target. These findings indicate that the action context mediates the influence that nontarget stimuli have on the processing of target responses.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it