Does Attention Increase the Value of Choice Alternatives?

Mormann, Milica; Russo, J. Edward

doi:10.1016/j.tics.2021.01.004

Cited by 45 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 102 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One account proposes that people direct their gaze towards options they believe to have a high value (Gluth, Kern, Kortmann, & Vitali, 2020), and shows that incorporating this account of gaze allocation into the aDDM can improve its ability to account for both eye movements and choice behavior. It can explain previously found direct effects of gaze on choice (J. F. Cavanagh, Wiecki, Kochar, & Frank, 2014;Mormann & Russo, 2021), and a gaze bias towards the option that is ultimately chosen that emerges as the choice progresses (Westbrook et al, 2020). This model was inspired by research that suggests that rewards can "capture" attention in an automatic or bottom-up fashion (Anderson, 2019;Anderson, Laurent, & Yantis, 2012;Vaidya & Fellows, 2015), but a more recent set of studies shows that the allocation of gaze to the most promising options may be goal-driven rather than reward-driven.…”

Section: Controlling the Flow Of Informationsupporting

confidence: 52%

Filling the gaps: Cognitive control as a critical lens for understanding mechanisms of value-based decision-making

Frömer¹,

Shenhav²

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research into value-based decision making has made tremendous progress in identifying behavioral and neural correlates of choice value. However, these correlates have been primarily viewed through a field-specific lens, focusing on how they contribute to the evaluation and selection between options to arrive at a choice. Here, we reveal blind-spots resulting from this limited perspective, and how they can be filled in through taking the perspective of cognitive control. We highlight three particular insights that this perspective offers: (1) a view towards the goal-relevance of one’s options and their features; (2) a view of decision-making correlates as a proxy for monitoring to determine control adjustments; (3) a view of those correlates as a proxy for monitoring that extends temporally and hierarchically beyond the immediate choice task. We show how adopting these complementary perspectives offers new insight into the determinants of both decisions and control; alternative interpretations for common findings in the neuroeconomic literature; and fruitful directions for future research.

show abstract

Section: Controlling the Flow Of Informationsupporting

confidence: 52%

Filling the gaps: Cognitive control as a critical lens for understanding mechanisms of value-based decision-making

Frömer¹,

Shenhav²

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It could also be used to help improve decisions such as in nudging healthy food choices (Hare et al, 2011;Leng et al, 2017). These behavior-level considerations aside, answering this question also requires us to investigate the fundamental role of attention in the construction of preference (Orquin & Loose, 2013;Weber & Johnson, 2009;Mormann & Russo, 2021). By manipulating attention both with a peripheral cue and differential exposure of the potential options, in combination with eye tracking and computational modeling, our study provides direct evidence for the AIV hypothesis that attention increases the value of an option.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…However, there are two important limitations with these results that stymie the conclusion that attention induces value. The first is that eye fixation and attention is not one and the same (see also Mormann & Russo, 2021). Attention is an internal state of the cognitive and neural system, whereas eye movement is a motor output of the system.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Attention biases preferential choice by enhancing an option's value

Pleskac¹,

Sun²,

Grunevski³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Does attending to an option lead to liking it? Though attention induced valuation is often hypothesized, evidence for this causal link has remained elusive. We test this hypothesis across two studies by manipulating attention during a preferential decision and its perceptual analog. In a free-viewing task, we found attention biased choice and eye movement pattern in the preferential decision more than during the perceptual analog. In a controlled-viewing task, we again found attention had a larger effect on choice in the preferential decision than its perceptual analog. Computational modeling of the data reveals that attention impacted preference by discounting the unattended option’s value. These results support the attention-induced valuation hypothesis. We suggest that attention impacts preference via a normalization process where an option's representation is scaled by its spatial and temporal neighbors. Attention provides a gain modulation on this representation at the sensory and value processing levels.

show abstract

“…Many recent developments in JDM focus on specifying the cognitive processes underlying value-based choice. This trend is reflected in the popularity of sequential sampling models (Busemeyer et al, 2019;Clithero, 2018), as well as by new research linking specific processlevel data (e.g., eye movements, search behavior) to parametric estimates of value-based cognitive models of choice (e.g., Mormann & Russo, 2021;Pachur et al, 2018). A common property of these models is that information about choice options is accumulated and integrated by a decision-maker into a single value signal that underpins choices.…”

Section: Models Of Judgment and Decision-makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incomparability and Incommensurability in Choice: No Common Currency of Value?

Walasek¹,

Brown²

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Models of decision-making typically assume the existence of some common currency of value, such as utility, happiness, or inclusive fitness. This common currency is taken to allow comparison of options and to underpin everyday choice. Here we explore the ideas that there is no universal value scale, that incommensurability of value pervades everyday choice, and hence that most existing models of decision-making in both economics and psychology are fundamentally limited. We propose an alternative approach. This alternative assumes that choice objects can only be compared with reference to specific but non-universal “covering values”. These covering values may reflect decision-makers’ goals, motivations, or current states. A complete model of choice must accommodate the range of possible covering values. We show that abandoning the common currency assumption in models of judgment and decision-making necessitates rank-based and heuristic models that contrast radically with conventional utility-based approaches. Moreover, the idea that there is no single common currency for object valuation parallels the idea, central to social choice theory, that the welfares of different individuals cannot be combined to represent the welfare of society overall. We note that if there is no universal value scale then Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem places severe bounds on the rationality of individual decision-making, and hence that there is a deep link between the incommensurability of value, inconsistencies in human decision-making, and rank-based coding of value. More generally, incommensurability raises the question of whether it will ever be possible to develop single-quantity-maximizing models of decision-making.

show abstract

Does Attention Increase the Value of Choice Alternatives?

Cited by 45 publications

References 102 publications

Filling the gaps: Cognitive control as a critical lens for understanding mechanisms of value-based decision-making

Filling the gaps: Cognitive control as a critical lens for understanding mechanisms of value-based decision-making

Attention biases preferential choice by enhancing an option's value

Incomparability and Incommensurability in Choice: No Common Currency of Value?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About