Attention
Contextual Cueing Task
Also called: contextual cuing, contextual cueing paradigm, spatial contextual cueing, T among L search, repeated configuration search
Measure implicit learning of visual layouts: participants find a rotated T among L shapes, and search speeds up on layouts that repeat.
8-11 minTimed: desktop or laptop with a mouse or trackpad
Free to start: 10 free participants per account, then $0.99 per participant for academic research, or any yearly plan. Preview any test free after you sign up.
- Papers, 2021 to 2025
- 102
- Evidence grade
- C
- Registered clinical studies
- 5
What it measures
Measures learning of repeated visual layouts during search. Participants find a T turned left or right among L shapes and press F or J for its direction. In every block 8 layouts repeat and 8 are new, and search usually gets faster on the repeated ones. The main score is this cueing effect in ms over the last two parts.
Constructs
- Implicit learning
- Spatial context memory
- Visual search
- Attentional guidance
Research uses
- Research on implicit learning in aging, amnesia and autism
- Studies of how memory guides attention
- Within-study comparison of learning during visual search
How the paradigm works
Contextual cueing shows that people learn the layout of a scene they search, often without noticing (Chun and Jiang, 1998). Participants look for a T among L shapes. Some arrangements repeat throughout the session and others are new each time, and with repetition the target is found faster in the repeated arrangements, because the layout guides attention to where the target has been. Researchers use the task to study implicit learning, memory and attention, including in aging, amnesia and autism. Whether the learning is fully implicit is debated: recognition tests at the end show a small amount of explicit memory that small studies tend to miss (Vadillo, Konstantinidis and Shanks, 2016).
More about the paradigm
Each display shows one T, turned so that its stem points left or right, and 11 L shapes, light on a dark panel, one to a cell of an invisible grid of 8 by 6 cells, with three items in each quarter of the field. After a 500 ms cross, the participant presses F if the T's stem points left and J if it points right, within 6 seconds. Every block of 16 displays holds 8 repeated layouts, each with its target and its L shapes always in the same places, and 8 new layouts whose targets sit at 8 fixed places among L shapes placed anew each time, so target places are equally familiar in both. The T's direction is drawn for each display, so a layout predicts where the target is but not which key to press. A session has 4 parts of 3 blocks (3 to 5 parts in the settings), with a rest and the part's accuracy between parts, after 12 practice displays with feedback. A short recognition test follows unless the researcher turns it off: the 8 repeated layouts and 8 new ones, one at a time, each answered as seen before or new. The layouts and their order come from the session's seed; the shapes and layouts were made for this task.
The main score is the cueing effect: the mean correct response time on new layouts minus that on repeated layouts over the last two parts, after leaving out responses under 200 ms and those slower than the participant's mean plus 2.5 standard deviations, as Zang and colleagues (2018) did. Positive values mean that search was faster on the repeated layouts. The task also reports the effect as a percent of the new-layout time, in each part and overall, the general speed-up across parts, accuracy, and the recognition hit and false alarm rates with d'. Scores support research and do not diagnose.
Scores
- Contextual Cueing Effectms
- Mean correct response time on new layouts minus repeated layouts over the last two parts, after trimming.
- Positive values mean faster search on repeated layouts
- Cueing Effect (Percent)%
- The cueing effect as a percent of the new-layout mean in the last two parts.
- Allows for overall speed
- Mean RT, Repeated Layoutsms
- Mean correct response time on repeated layouts in the last two parts.
- Informational
- Mean RT, New Layoutsms
- Mean correct response time on new layouts in the last two parts.
- Informational
- Cueing Effect, Part 1ms
- New minus repeated in part 1.
- Usually near 0 before the layouts are learned
- Cueing Effect, Part 2ms
- New minus repeated in part 2.
- Informational
- Cueing Effect, Part 3ms
- New minus repeated in part 3.
- Informational
- Cueing Effect, Part 4ms
- New minus repeated in part 4. Blank when the session had 3 parts.
- Informational
- Cueing Effect, Part 5ms
- New minus repeated in part 5. Blank when the session had fewer parts.
- Informational
- Cueing Effect, All Partsms
- New minus repeated over the whole session.
- Informational
- Search Speed-Upms
- Mean correct response time in part 1 minus the last part, both kinds of layout together.
- Positive values mean search got faster with practice
- Accuracy%
- Share of test displays answered with the right key.
- Higher is better
- Accuracy, Repeated Layouts%
- Share of repeated layouts answered with the right key.
- Informational
- Accuracy, New Layouts%
- Share of new layouts answered with the right key.
- Informational
- Recognition Hit Rate%
- Share of repeated layouts called seen before in the recognition test. Blank when the test is off.
- Compare with the false alarm rate
- Recognition False Alarm Rate%
- Share of new layouts called seen before in the recognition test.
- Informational
- Recognition d'd'
- Recognition sensitivity, with the log-linear correction.
- Above 0 means repeated layouts were told from new ones
- Usable Repeated Trialscount
- Correct, trimmed responses to repeated layouts in the last two parts.
- Fewer than 20 is flagged for review
- Usable New Trialscount
- Correct, trimmed responses to new layouts in the last two parts.
- Fewer than 20 is flagged for review
- Anticipationscount
- Responses within 100 ms of a display's onset.
- Quality check
- Timeoutscount
- Displays with no answer within 6 seconds.
- Quality check
- Trimmed Responsescount
- Correct responses left out of the means: under 200 ms, or slower than the participant's mean plus 2.5 SD.
- Informational
- Displays Answeredcount
- Test displays answered with F or J.
- Informational
- Planned Displayscount
- Test displays in the session: 48 per part.
- Informational
Use and evidence
102 papers from 2021 to 2025 name this task in their title or abstract, down 20% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 182 of 395 test families in our census. See the counts for every test.
Show the numbers
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2025 | 27 |
| 2024 | 29 |
| 2023 | 15 |
| 2022 | 11 |
| 2021 | 20 |
| 2020 | 31 |
| 2019 | 29 |
| 2018 | 25 |
| 2017 | 20 |
| 2016 | 22 |
| 2015 | 20 |
| 2014 | 23 |
| 2013 | 31 |
| 2012 | 29 |
| 2011 | 28 |
| 2010 | 51 |
| 2009 | 17 |
| 2008 | 11 |
| 2007 | 12 |
| 2006 | 13 |
| 2005 | 11 |
| 2004 | 10 |
| 2003 | 8 |
| 2002 | 3 |
| 2001 | 6 |
| 2000 | 3 |
Use grade C
100 to 299 papers from 2021 to 2025.
Evidence grade C
At least 2 test-retest papers, 30 reliability or validity papers or 3 registered clinical studies.
- Papers on test-retest reliability
- 1
- Papers on reliability or validity
- 18
- Registered clinical studies using it as an outcome
- 5
How the grades work
Use: A is 1,000 or more papers from 2021 to 2025, B 300 to 999, C 100 to 299, D 30 to 99 and E fewer than 30. Evidence: A means at least 25 papers report its test-retest reliability and at least 25 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome; B, at least 8 test-retest papers, and either 5 registered clinical studies or 150 reliability or validity papers; C, at least 2 test-retest papers, 30 reliability or validity papers or 3 registered clinical studies; D, little published measurement evidence found. The counts measure use. They include every paper that names the task in its title or abstract. Grades describe the published research on this task, not ConductCognition's version of it.
Source: ConductCognition test census 0.14.0, counted 31 October 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
Task design
The trial sequence as the test runs in ConductCognition.
- Display
- One T and 11 L shapes drawn by code, light on a dark panel of 560 by 432 px, one to a cell of an invisible grid of 8 by 6 cells of 64 px, with three items in each quarter of the field. Each L's corner is set in 6 px from the end of its base.
- Target
- The T's stem points left (F) or right (J), drawn for each display: 4 of each direction per kind of layout in each block. Targets never sit in the 4 cells around the cross.
- Layouts
- Each block shows 8 repeated layouts, each with its target and L shapes always in the same places, and 8 new layouts with targets at 8 fixed places and L shapes placed anew. The 16 target places are 4 in each quarter, two repeated and two new, matched for distance from the center.
- Trial
- A 500 ms cross, then the display until F or J, or 6,000 ms.
- Session
- 4 parts (standard; 3 to 5) of 3 blocks of 16 displays, in a seeded order within each block, with a rest and the part's accuracy between parts.
- Practice
- 12 displays with layouts used only there, each followed by feedback for 800 ms.
- Recognition test
- On by default: the 8 repeated layouts and 8 new ones in a seeded order, each until F (seen before) or J (new), with no time limit and no feedback.
- Scoring
- Correct responses from 200 ms up to the participant's mean plus 2.5 SD; the cueing effect is the new-layout mean minus the repeated-layout mean over the last two parts.
The standard version uses 12 repeated and 12 new layouts per block over about 30 blocks; this test uses 8 and 8 over 12 blocks, with its own grid and shapes, and keys for the T's direction as in the source. Zang and colleagues found an effect with 4 and 4 layouts per block as large as with 12 and 12, but this test's values compare within a study rather than with published ones. The cueing effect has low reliability for individuals, so the test gives no percentiles. The scores support research and do not diagnose.
Quality checks
Each session is marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason, before you see its scores.
Scored rows: contextual_cueing_test from the scored run, F or J (chance 50%) within 6,000 ms, correctness from the recorded key for the T's direction. Below chance invalidates and not above chance is flagged. One key on 90% of answers invalidates when accuracy is not above chance. Missed responses and responses under 100 ms follow the timed-test rule. Fewer than 20 usable trials of either kind of layout in the last two parts is flagged and withholds the percentile.
Why these rules
Accuracy significantly below chance (one-sided exact test, p < .05) cannot come from guessing; it means the response mapping was reversed or the task was not followed (Slick, Sherman and Iverson 1999 treat below-chance forced-choice performance as definite response bias). Chance-level accuracy can be a real result in impaired participants, so it is only flagged. One option on at least 90% of answered trials, when the correct options are balanced and accuracy is not above chance, means the answers did not depend on the items (the task counterpart of long-string responding in surveys; Curran 2016). Missed responses and responses under 100 ms keep the platform's timed-test rule: more than max(3, 25%) missed responses or more than max(2, 20%) responses under 100 ms invalidate, and any is flagged. A response under 100 ms cannot be a reaction to the stimulus. The effect is a difference between two means, so it needs enough correct trials of each kind of layout; the limit of 20 is a ConductScience choice.
No percentile. Scores and quality flags only.
Running this test
Settings you can change
| Setting | Standard | Allowed |
|---|---|---|
| Parts | 4 | 3 to 5 |
| Recognition test | On | On or off |
Yearly plans can change settings within these limits. Free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Need a setting this test does not have?
Devices and languages
- Timed test: participants need a desktop or laptop with a mouse or trackpad. Participant devices
- Languages: English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese.
- Available on: Every plan, including the free plan.
- No percentile. Scores and quality flags only. How norms work
- Recruiting online? See the setup guides for Prolific, Sona Systems, CloudResearch Connect and Qualtrics.
Cite and describe
Participants completed the Contextual Cueing Task in a web browser (ConductCognition task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0; Chun & Jiang, 1998), with the standard settings (parts: 4; recognition test: On). The main score was contextual cueing effect (mean correct response time on new layouts minus repeated layouts over the last two parts, after trimming).
ConductCognition versions: task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0. Every export records the versions each session used, for a methods section.
- Chun, M. M., & Jiang, Y. (1998). Contextual cueing: Implicit learning and memory of visual context guides spatial attention. Cognitive Psychology, 36(1), 28-71. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1998.0681The task: a T among L shapes, repeated and new layouts, and a recognition test.
- Zang, X., Zinchenko, A., Jia, L., Assumpção, L., & Li, H. (2018). Global repetition influences contextual cueing. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 402. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00402The standard display and procedure, the trimming of response times, and the effect with 4 repeated layouts per block.
- Vadillo, M. A., Konstantinidis, E., & Shanks, D. R. (2016). Underpowered samples, false negatives, and unconscious learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23(1), 87-102. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0892-6Recognition tests show small but real memory for the repeated layouts.
- Meyen, S., Vadillo, M. A., von Luxburg, U., & Franz, V. H. (2024). No evidence for contextual cueing beyond explicit recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 31(3), 907-930. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-023-02358-3Chun and Jiang's Experiment 2, and how to compare the effect with recognition.
- Vadillo, M. A., Malejka, S., & Shanks, D. R. (2025). Mapping the reliability multiverse of contextual cuing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 51(6), 910-927. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0001410The cueing effect's low reliability for individuals.
Source papers
- Chun MM, Jiang Y (1998). Contextual cueing: Implicit learning and memory of visual context guides spatial attention. Cognitive Psychology, 36(1):28-71.N 14, Young adults
- Zang X, Zinchenko A, Jia L, Assumpção L, Li H (2018). Global repetition influences contextual cueing. Frontiers in Psychology, 9:402.N 28, Young adults
Questions
How long does the Contextual Cueing Task take?
About 8 to 11 minutes, as listed in the test library.
What device does a participant need?
Timed test: participants need a desktop or laptop with a mouse or trackpad. The browser must be Chrome, Edge, Firefox or Safari.
What scores does it produce?
Contextual Cueing Effect, Cueing Effect (Percent), Mean RT, Repeated Layouts, Mean RT, New Layouts, Cueing Effect, Part 1, Cueing Effect, Part 2, Cueing Effect, Part 3, Cueing Effect, Part 4, Cueing Effect, Part 5, Cueing Effect, All Parts, Search Speed-Up, Accuracy, Accuracy, Repeated Layouts, Accuracy, New Layouts, Recognition Hit Rate, Recognition False Alarm Rate, Recognition d', Usable Repeated Trials, Usable New Trials, Anticipations, Timeouts, Trimmed Responses, Displays Answered and Planned Displays. Each session is also marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason.
How widely is the Contextual Cueing Task used in research?
102 papers from 2021 to 2025 name it in their title or abstract, down 20% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 182 of 395 test families in the ConductCognition test census (use grade C). Source: ConductCognition test census 0.14.0, counted 31 October 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
How much reliability evidence does the Contextual Cueing Task have?
In the published research, 1 paper reports its test-retest reliability and 5 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome (evidence grade C in the ConductCognition test census).
Does it report a percentile?
No. Scores and quality flags only.
Which settings can a researcher change?
Parts (3 to 5) and recognition test (On or off). Settings can be changed on yearly plans; free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Which languages can participants use?
Participants can take this test in English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese. English is on every plan, and the other languages come with yearly plans. Have a native speaker read the machine-translated text before launch.
Is this a clinical test?
No. ConductCognition is for research use only. It runs, scores and exports the test; clinical interpretation is outside the platform.
Every test: the full test list.
Run this test in your next study
Start free with 10 free participants on any test, then use participant credits or a yearly plan.