2017
DOI: 10.3758/s13414-017-1322-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mixed signals: The effect of conflicting reward- and goal-driven biases on selective attention

Abstract: Attentional selection depends on the interaction between exogenous (stimulus-driven), endogenous (goal-driven), and selection history (experience-driven) factors. While endogenous and exogenous biases have been widely investigated, less is known about their interplay with value-driven attention. The present study investigated the interaction between reward-history and goal-driven biases on perceptual sensitivity (d’) and response time (RT) in a modified cueing paradigm presenting two coloured cues, followed by… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

3
13
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 61 publications
3
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This is the internal bias signal created by reward expectation, which in this case is spatially congruent with both the target and the saccade. This baseline signal is consistent with previous neurophysiological studies using the 1DR task ( Takikawa et al, 2002 ; Sato and Hikosaka, 2002 ; Ding and Hikosaka, 2006 ), and may be interpreted as a neural correlate of spatial attention ( Maunsell, 2004 ; Peck et al, 2009 ; Preciado et al, 2017 ).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 90%
“…This is the internal bias signal created by reward expectation, which in this case is spatially congruent with both the target and the saccade. This baseline signal is consistent with previous neurophysiological studies using the 1DR task ( Takikawa et al, 2002 ; Sato and Hikosaka, 2002 ; Ding and Hikosaka, 2006 ), and may be interpreted as a neural correlate of spatial attention ( Maunsell, 2004 ; Peck et al, 2009 ; Preciado et al, 2017 ).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 90%
“…That is the internal bias signal created by reward expectation, which in this case is spatially congruent with both the target and the saccade. This baseline signal is consistent with previous neurophysiological studies using the 1DR task (Takikawa et al, 2002; Sato and Hikosaka, 2002; Ikeda and Hikosaka, 2003), and may be interpreted as a neural correlate of spatial attention (Maunsell, 2004; Preciado et al, 2017).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 90%
“…That expectation (and/or attention; Maunsell, 2004; Preciado et al, 2017) is what drives the variations in baseline is clear; during each block, the rewarded location is known to the subject during the fixation period, whereas the target location is not. So it is important to underscore that, during incongruent trials, the baseline activity R b (firing rate in a 250 ms window preceding target onset) is strongly predictive of outcome.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A primary distinction between the CS and CO tasks is the degree to which they are presumed to engage exogenous, or saliency-dependent, attention (defining the saliency of a stimulus requires some nuance that goes beyond consideration of physical attributes, but the distinction is clear across our experimental conditions; see [32,33]). Regardless of urgency, oddball tasks strongly promote congruence between target location, spatial attention, and ultimately, motor planning.…”
Section: Visual Target Selection or Visual Saliency Detection?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, the saliency of a feature singleton is positively modulated by perceptual priming effects that occur when the oddball stimulus is the same color on multiple trials in succession [37][38][39]. Such non-volitional priming, along with the learned association between singleton and rewarded saccadic choice, are factors that would tend to reinforce the inherent saliency of the target and presumably its neural correlate in V cell activity [26,33,40]. In contrast, the CS task minimizes the import of saliency-based mechanisms to guiding choice by limiting physical saliency as a means of preferentially drawing attention to the target on any given trial (for discussion, see [20]).…”
Section: Visual Target Selection or Visual Saliency Detection?mentioning
confidence: 99%