Top

Gepubliceerd in:

10-02-2023 | Original Article

Learned cognitive control counteracts value-driven attentional capture

Auteurs: Annabelle Walle, Michel D. Druey, Ronald Hübner

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 7/2023

Abstract

Stimuli formerly associated with monetary reward capture our attention, even if this attraction is contrary to current goals (so-called value-driven attentional capture [VDAC], see Anderson (Ann N Y Acad Sci 1369:24–39, 2016), for a review). Despite the growing literature to this topic, little is known about the boundary conditions for the occurrence of VDAC. In three experiments, we investigated the role of response conflicts and spatial uncertainty regarding the target location during the training and test phase for the emergence of value-driven effects. Thus, we varied the occurrence of a response conflict, search components, and the type of task in both phases. In the training, value-driven effects were rather observed if the location of the value-associated target was not predictable and a response conflict was present. Value-driven effects also only occurred, if participants have not learned to deal with a response conflict, yet. However, the introduction of a response conflict during learning of the color-value association seemed to prevent attention to be distracted by this feature in a subsequent test. The study provides new insights not only into the boundary conditions of the learning of value associations, but also into the learning of cognitive control.

vorige artikel Using synchronized eye movements to assess attentional engagement

volgende artikel Visual memory of a co-actor’s target during joint search

Note that from a theoretical perspective, a value effect should also be found in this kind of task (see, e.g., Sha & Jiang, 2016). Nevertheless, often no such effect is observed (e.g., Anderson et al., 2011b; Kim & Beck, 2020; Roper et al., 2014). One reason could be a ceiling effect. Alternatively, participants could use other features than the value color to find the target (Walle & Druey, 2021).

Initially, we recruited 24 participants. However, we did not establish a uniform payment for those participants, meaning they could choose to receive either the full amount of money earned, or course credit in exchange for 10 € of the amount earned, plus the remaining entitlement. Due to discussion and suggestions in literature relating to the appropriate payment in tasks of this type (Anderson & Halpern, 2017), we excluded the 17 participants with the “hybrid” payment and replaced them with new participants.

They also found a difference between high and low in the incongruent condition, but much less pronounced than in the congruent one. Since the authors did not report this comparison, it is unclear, whether it is significant.

Abrahamse, E., Braem, S., Notebaert, W., & Verguts, T. (2016). Grounding cognitive control in associative learning. Psychological Bulletin, 142(7), 693–728. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000047PubMedCrossRef

Anderson, B. A. (2015). Value-driven attentional priority is context specific. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22(3), 750–756. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0724-0CrossRef

Anderson, B. A. (2016). The attention habit: how reward learning shapes attentional selection. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1369(1), 24–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.12957PubMedCrossRef

Anderson, B. A., Faulkner, M. L., Rilee, J. J., Yantis, S., & Marvel, C. L. (2013a). Attentional bias for nondrug reward is magnified in addiction. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 21(6), 499–506. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034575PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Anderson, B. A., & Halpern, M. (2017). On the value-dependence of value-driven attentional capture. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 79(4), 1001–1011. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-017-1289-6CrossRef

Anderson, B. A., & Kim, H. (2019). On the relationship between value-driven and stimulus-driven attentional capture. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 81(3), 607–613. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-019-01670-2CrossRef

Anderson, B. A., Laurent, P. A., & Yantis, S. (2011a). Value-driven attentional capture. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(25), 10367–10371. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1104047108CrossRef

Anderson, B. A., Laurent, P. A., & Yantis, S. (2011b). Learned value magnifies salience-based attentional capture. PLOS ONE, 6(11), e27926. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0027926PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Anderson, B. A., Laurent, P. A., & Yantis, S. (2012). Generalization of value-based attentional priority. Visual Cognition, 20(6), 647–658. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2012.679711CrossRef

Anderson, B. A., Laurent, P. A., & Yantis, S. (2013b). Reward predictions bias attentional selection. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00262PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Anderson, B. A., & Yantis, S. (2012). Value-driven attentional and oculomotor capture during goal-directed, unconstrained viewing. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 74(8), 1644–1653. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-012-0348-2CrossRef

Awh, E., Belopolsky, A. V., & Theeuwes, J. (2012). Top-down versus bottom-up attentional control: a failed theoretical dichotomy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(8), 437–443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2012.06.010PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Becker, M. W., Hemsteger, S. H., Chantland, E., & Liu, T. (2020). Value-based attention capture: differential effects of loss and gain contingencies. Journal of Vision, 20(5), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.20.5.4CrossRef

Botvinick, M. M., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Carter, C. S., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychological Review, 108(3), 624–652. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.108.3.624PubMedCrossRef

Braem, S., Abrahamse, E. L., Duthoo, W., & Notebaert, W. (2014a). What determines the specificity of conflict adaptation? A review, critical analysis, and proposed synthesis. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01134PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Braem, S., Hickey, C., Duthoo, W., & Notebaert, W. (2014b). Reward determines the context-sensitivity of cognitive control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40(5), 1769–1778. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037554PubMedCrossRef

Chelazzi, L., Perlato, A., Santandrea, E., & Della Libera, C. (2013). Rewards teach visual selective attention. Vision Research, 85, 58–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2012.12.005PubMedCrossRef

Dreisbach, G., & Haider, H. (2009). How task representations guide attention: Further evidence for the shielding function of task sets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35(2), 477–486. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014647PubMedCrossRef

Egner, T. (2008). Multiple conflict-driven control mechanisms in the human brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(10), 374–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2008.07.001PubMedCrossRef

Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception & Psychophysics, 16(1), 143–149. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03203267CrossRef

Failing, M., & Theeuwes, J. (2018). Selection history: how reward modulates selectivity of visual attention. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25(2), 514–538. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-017-1380-yCrossRef

Gaspelin, N., & Luck, S. J. (2018). The role of inhibition in avoiding distraction by salient stimuli. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 22(1), 79–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2017.11.001PubMedCrossRef

Goschke, T., & Dreisbach, G. (2008). Conflict-triggered goal shielding: response conflicts attenuate background monitoring for prospective memory cues. Psychological Science, 19(1), 25–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02042.xPubMedCrossRef

Gratton, G., Coles, M. G. H., & Donchin, E. (1992). Optimizing the use of information: strategic control of activation of responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121(4), 480–506. https://doi.org/10.1037//0096-3445.121.4.480PubMedCrossRef

Hübner, R., & Schlösser, J. (2010). Monetary reward increases attentional effort in the flanker task. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17(6), 821–826. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.17.6.821CrossRef

Hübner, R., & Töbel, L. (2019). Conflict resolution in the Eriksen flanker task: similarities and differences to the Simon task. PLOS ONE, 14(3), e0214203. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0214203PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Ivanov, Y., & Theeuwes, J. (2021). Distractor suppression leads to reduced flanker interference. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 83(2), 624–636. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-020-02159-zCrossRef

Jeffreys, H. (1961). Theory of probability (3rd ed.). Oxford University.

Kass, R. E., & Raftery, A. E. (1995). Bayes factors. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 90(430), 773–795. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1995.10476572CrossRef

Kim, S., & Beck, M. R. (2020). Impact of relative and absolute values on selective attention. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 27, 735–741. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-020-01729-4CrossRef

Le Pelley, M. E., Pearson, D., Griffiths, O., & Beesley, T. (2015). When goals conflict with values: counterproductive attentional and oculomotor capture by reward-related stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144(1), 158–171. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000037PubMedCrossRef

Marchner, J. R., & Preuschhof, C. (2018). Reward history but not search history explains value-driven attentional capture. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 80(6), 1436–1448. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-018-1513-zCrossRef

Merz, S., Frings, C., & Spence, C. (2021). When irrelevant information helps: extending the Eriksen-flanker task into a multisensory world. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 83(2), 776–789. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-020-02066-3CrossRef

Milner, A. E., MacLean, M. H., & Giesbrecht, B. (2020). The persistence of value-driven attention capture is task dependent. PsyArxiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/967k8CrossRef

Mine, C., & Saiki, J. (2015). Task-irrelevant stimulus-reward association induces value-driven attentional capture. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 77(6), 1896–1907. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-015-0894-5CrossRef

Mine, C., & Saiki, J. (2018). Pavlovian reward learning elicits attentional capture by reward-associated stimuli. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 80, 1083–1095. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-018-1502-2CrossRef

Miranda, A. T., & Palmer, E. M. (2014). Intrinsic motivation and attentional capture from gamelike features in a visual search task. Behavior Research Methods, 46(1), 159–172. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-013-0357-7PubMedCrossRef

Morey, R. D. (2008). Confidence intervals from normalized data: a correction to Cousineau (2005). Tutorial in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 4(2), 61–64.CrossRef

Morey, R. D., & Rouder, J. N. (2018). BayesFactor: computation of Bayes factors for common designs (0.9.12-4.2). https://cran.r-project.org/package=BayesFactor

Oleson, M. (2004). Exploring the relationship between money attitudes and Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 28(1), 83–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1470-6431.2004.00338.xCrossRef

R Core Team. (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org

Roper, Z. J. J., Vecera, S. P., & Vaidya, J. G. (2014). Value-driven attentional capture in adolescence. Psychological Science, 25(11), 1987–1993. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614545654PubMedCrossRef

Rouder, J. N., Morey, R. D., Speckman, P. L., & Province, J. M. (2012). Default Bayes factors for ANOVA designs. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 56(5), 356–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmp.2012.08.001CrossRef

Rouder, J. N., Speckman, P. L., Sun, D., Morey, R. D., & Iverson, G. (2009). Bayesian t tests for accepting and rejecting the null hypothesis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16(2), 225–237. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.16.2.225CrossRef

Sali, A. W., Anderson, B. A., Yantis, S., Mostofsky, S. H., & Rosch, K. S. (2018). Reduced value-driven attentional capture among children with ADHD compared to typically developing controls. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 46(6), 1187–1200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-017-0345-yPubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Sawaki, R., & Luck, S. J. (2010). Capture versus suppression of attention by salient singletons: electrophysiological evidence for an automatic attend-to-me signal. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72(6), 1455–1470. https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.72.6.1455CrossRef

Sha, L., & Jiang, Y. (2016). Components of reward-driven attentional capture. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 78(2), 403–414. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-015-1038-7CrossRef

Souza, A. S., & Oberauer, K. (2015). Time-based forgetting in visual working memory reflects temporal distinctiveness, not decay. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22(1), 156–162. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0652-zCrossRef

Theeuwes, J., & Belopolsky, A. V. (2012). Reward grabs the eye: oculomotor capture by rewarding stimuli. Vision Research, 74, 80–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2012.07.024PubMedCrossRef

Verguts, T., & Notebaert, W. (2008). Hebbian learning of cognitive control: dealing with specific and nonspecific adaptation. Psychological Review, 115(2), 518–525. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.115.2.518PubMedCrossRef

Verguts, T., & Notebaert, W. (2009). Adaptation by binding: a learning account of cognitive control. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13(6), 252–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2009.02.007PubMedCrossRef

Wagenmakers, E.-J., Marsman, M., Jamil, T., Ly, A., Verhagen, J., Love, J., Selker, R., Gronau, Q. F., Šmíra, M., Epskamp, S., Matzke, D., Rouder, J. N., & Morey, R. D. (2018). Bayesian inference for psychology. Part I: theoretical advantages and practical ramifications. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25(1), 35–57. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-017-1343-3CrossRef

Walle, A., & Druey, M. D. (2021). Beyond looking for the rewarded target: the effects of reward on attention in search tasks. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.632442PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Walle, A., Hübner, R., & Druey, M. D. (2021). Value associations modulate visual attention and response selection. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.656185PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Wang, B., & Theeuwes, J. (2018). Statistical regularities modulate attentional capture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 44(1), 13–17. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000472PubMedCrossRef

Wang, B., van Driel, J., Ort, E., & Theeuwes, J. (2019). Anticipatory distractor suppression elicited by statistical regularities in visual search. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 31(10), 1535–1548. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_01433PubMedCrossRef

Watson, P., Pearson, D., Theeuwes, J., Most, S. B., & Le Pelley, M. E. (2020). Delayed disengagement of attention from distractors signalling reward. Cognition, 195, 104125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019.104125PubMedCrossRef

Wetzels, R., & Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2012). A default Bayesian hypothesis test for correlations and partial correlations. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19(6), 1057–1064. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-012-0295-xCrossRef

Wolfe, J. M., & Horowitz, T. S. (2017). Five factors that guide attention in visual search. Nature Human Behaviour. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0058PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Yeung, N., Botvinick, M. M., & Cohen, J. D. (2004). The neural basis of error detection: conflict monitoring and the error-related negativity. Psychological Review, 111, 931–959. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.111.4.931PubMedCrossRef

Titel: Learned cognitive control counteracts value-driven attentional capture
Auteurs: Annabelle Walle
Michel D. Druey
Ronald Hübner
Publicatiedatum: 10-02-2023
Uitgeverij: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research / Uitgave 7/2023
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-023-01792-1

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 7/2023

Preparing auditory task switching in a task with overlapping and non-overlapping response sets

Visuospatial working memory abilities in children analyzed by the bricks game task (BGT)

Using synchronized eye movements to assess attentional engagement

The interactive effect of external rewards and self-determined choice on memory

Manipulating free will beliefs using online video games

A comparative study of the cognitive load of basic-level category, superordinate category and subordinate category