In cueing studies, valid cues indicate the correct upcoming target location, whereas invalid cues appear away from the target. Response time differences (mostly: faster response times for valid, compared to invalid trials) indicate attention capture by the cue. In the contingent-capture protocol, this validity effect is restricted to cues that match the searched for target. In a relatively recent study, however, it has been found that also previous cue validity exerts an influence on validity effects in the contingent-capture protocol [Goller, F., & Ansorge, U. (2015). There is more to trial history than priming in attentional capture experiments. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 77(5), 1574–1584. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-015-0896-3]: if a cue was valid in a previous trial, subsequent cues lead to a higher validity effect, whereas the opposite was found for cues following invalid trials. In some cases, this was even true for cues that did not match the searched-for target. However, the aforementioned study did not control for additional factors, such as luminance and influences beneficial for trial history effects, such as weaker top-down search sets. The experiments proposed in this registered report aim at deepening our understanding of validity sequence effects within the contingent-capture protocol by way of implementing these control conditions.