特征和位置信息在价值驱动注意捕获中的作用

本研究采用训练−测试范式考察颜色和位置信息在价值驱动注意捕获中的作用。实验1考察是否存在基于具体位置的价值驱动的注意捕获效应。在训练阶段, 被试对8个位置中两个位置出现的红色目标反应伴随着高奖励反馈, 而对另外两个位置出现的红色目标反应伴随着低奖励反馈, 其它4个位置为中性位置, 没有目标出现。在测试阶段, 一半试次中红色刺激作为分心物出现。结果发现, 只有当分心刺激出现在高奖励位置和两个高奖励位置之间的中性位置时才能够捕获注意; 实验2考察颜色和位置信息在价值驱动注意捕获中的交互作用。在训练阶段, 将颜色特征和位置信息联合起来进行学习。在测试阶段, 和高、低奖励相联结的颜色刺激各在1/3试次中作为分心物出现。结果发现, 只有当高奖励颜色出现在高奖励位置或出现在高奖励位置之间的中性位置时才能够捕获注意。研究结果表明：(1)位置联结的价值驱动的注意捕获效应能够泛化到特定邻近位置上; (2)个体在训练阶段将颜色和位置的联合特征与奖励建立联结, 训练阶段建立的联结不能泛化到部分特征上。价值驱动注意捕获效应的泛化具有选择性。     

社会行为的效价信息对注意捕获的影响：基于帮助和阻碍行为的探讨

采用学习-测验两任务范式, 通过3项实验探讨了社会行为的效价信息对注意捕获的影响。在学习阶段, 被试观看具有积极效价的帮助行为(某智能体帮助另一智能体爬山)和消极效价的阻碍行为(某智能体阻碍另一智能体爬山), 以及与各自运动特性匹配的无社会交互行为, 其目的为建立不同智能体颜色与社会行为效价信息的联结关系。在测验阶段, 则分别检验社会行为中的施动方(帮助者和阻碍者)颜色和受动方(被帮助者和被阻碍者)颜色的注意捕获效应。结果发现, 消极社会行为中施动方颜色和受动方颜色均更容易捕获注意, 而积极社会行为效价信息并没有改变联结特征值的注意捕获效应; 且相比于受动方, 与消极社会行为效价建立联结的施动方颜色的注意捕获效应更强。该结果提示, 存在消极社会行为效价驱动的注意捕获, 且消极的效价信息与卷入社会行为所有个体的特征建立联结, 但该联结中施动方物理特征具有更高的注意优先性。这一发现暗示, 声誉信息与对社会交互行为的整体表征可能综合作用于对社会交互事件的注意选择。     

自上而下的目标调节奖赏联结干扰子的注意定向和脱离

近年来传统的注意控制理论已经无法解释部分注意控制现象,有研究者提出将奖赏联结/价值驱动的注意捕获作为一种新的注意引导源。奖赏联结的注意捕获是否会受到自上而下的目标定势的调节已成为该领域一个重要的理论问题。研究采用空间线索范式的变式,探讨了奖赏联结干扰子与目标的相关性对奖赏联结注意捕获中的定向和脱离的调节作用。研究结果发现:当学习阶段习得的奖赏联结干扰子在测验阶段与目标相关时(实验1),有奖干扰子相对于无奖干扰子具有优先的注意定向和延迟脱离;而学习阶段习得的奖赏联结干扰子在测验阶段与目标无关时(实验2),有奖干扰子和无奖干扰子在注意定向和脱离方面均无显著差异。由此可见,奖赏联结的注意捕获并不是完全自动化的,自上而下的目标定势能够调节其注意定向和脱离的成分,支持奖赏联结的注意捕获与自上而下的目标定势交互引导视觉注意的观点。     

无关工作记忆表征的负性情绪信息能否捕获视觉注意?一项眼动研究

研究通过分析视觉搜索任务的首次注视点和行为反应时, 探讨无关工作记忆表征的负性情绪信息对视觉注意选择的影响。实验1发现在反映早期注意选择的首次注视点百分率指标上, 不管工作记忆表征的情绪效价如何, 均出现了显著的注意捕获效应; 实验2发现当采用中性情绪靶子刺激时, 首次注视点百分率指标上仍表现出了稳健的注意捕获效应; 在首次注视点持续时间指标上, 实验1和实验2均发现记忆匹配条件的干扰刺激显著小于控制条件的干扰刺激, 表现出注意的快速脱离; 而在行为反应时指标上, 早期的注意捕获效应消失(实验1), 甚至被反转为注意抑制效应(实验2)。这些结果表明在早期注意选择阶段, 记忆驱动的注意捕获效应不受工作记忆表征情绪效价的影响, 但认知控制会在早期注意捕获之后促使注意快速脱离记忆匹配的干扰刺激, 其作用效果受靶子刺激情绪效价的调节。     

基于双眼视差探讨深度知觉信息对背景线索效应的影响

背景线索效应是由重复场景导致搜索效率提高的现象。以往研究发现三维场景下能获得背景线索效应,但对三维场景下深度知觉线索信息如何影响空间场景提供有效线索引导注意仍缺乏实证研究。本研究以矩阵刺激为材料,通过设置不同的刺激项目水平数探讨深度知觉线索对背景线索效应的影响模式。结果发现:(1)在场景布局由较少项目构成时,深度知觉线索提供目标与刺激项目的有效联结,获得背景线索效应;(2)当刺激项目水平达到一定程度时,深度知觉线索增加了背景线索任务的搜索难度,干扰了重复场景中的背景信息对注意的指导性加工,背景线索效应消失。研究结果为三维场景下深度信息对空间场景中注意引导加工的影响提供了证据。     

奖励影响注意选择的认知加工机制

奖励不仅能够塑造行为, 也能影响个体的内部心理过程。在注意选择过程中, 与奖励联结的刺激能够吸引注意资源。当目标刺激与奖励联结时, 能够易化注意选择过程; 当分心刺激与奖励联结时, 能够阻碍注意选择过程。可见, 奖励从不同角度对注意选择产生影响。奖励对注意选择的影响可能有其特有的认知机制, 并且奖励对注意的捕获效应受到许多因素的调节, 如奖励预测、工作记忆容量、人格特质及刺激的新异性。未来的研究应该尝试将奖励影响注意选择的研究成果应用于不良注意偏向临床干预的实践领域。     

积极情绪反馈对注意捕获影响的实验研究

目的：研究采用“学习-测试”范式,通过3个实验探讨积极社会情绪反馈对注意捕获的影响。方法：实验1,在学习阶段做出反应后,分别给予积极情绪和中性情绪反馈,探讨积极情绪和中性情绪捕获注意的情况;实验2,学习阶段做出反应后,没有任何情绪反馈;实验3,改变学习阶段积极情绪和中性情绪反馈图片出现的频率,探讨图片出现频率对注意捕获的影响。结果：（1）与中性情绪相比,积极情绪捕获了较多注意（实验1）;（2）无情绪反馈时,经过多次练习的刺激作为干扰刺激也捕获到了注意（实验2）;（3）积极情绪影响刺激注意优先性的过程还受到积极情绪图片出现频率的影响（实验3）。结论：积极情绪捕获注意的机制中,也有自上而下目标驱动的机制在起作用;情绪图片出现的频率也会影响社社会情绪对注意的捕获。     

自上而下的注意控制定势在注意捕获中的作用

采用经典前线索范式的变式, 通过100%有效的提示考察了自上而下的注意控制定势在注意捕获中的作用。实验1要求被试在整个实验中只搜索一个固定颜色的目标, 但是通过在每个试次前对目标进行提示加强注意控制定势的强度。实验2通过在每个试次中变化要搜索的目标颜色使被试必须建立两个更强的注意控制定势。实验结果一致表明和目标颜色相匹配的线索捕获了注意, 而和目标颜色无关的线索被抑制; 实验2的捕获效应和抑制效应都显著大于实验1; 对无关冲突线索和无关中性线索的注意抑制效应没有差异, 抑制效应显著小于捕获效应。研究表明自上而下的注意控制定势通过把注意从和目标不匹配的特征位置转移发挥作用, 支持注意转移假说; 对匹配线索的捕获和对无关线索的抑制运用了同一加工系统, 抑制作为捕获的附加产品出现, 两者都可以作为注意捕获的指标。     

不受知觉负载调节的注意捕获效应：生态信息的作用

快速探测到环境中具有生态意义的信息是适应性行为的一种重要表现。本研究采用注意捕获范式检验具有生态意义的信息是否能够被注意系统自动化加工。具体而言, 我们考察对负性面孔中的生态意义信息的加工是否受任务和知觉负载的影响。在实验一中, 我们发现负性面孔相对于中性面孔在高低知觉负载下的注意捕获能力没有显著差异, 表明负性面孔在高低负载下都具有加工优先性。为了分离刺激突显性与生态意义二个因素对实验结果的影响, 在实验二中, 我们将负性面孔刺激替换为具有突显性但不含有生态信息的颜色块刺激, 发现颜色块在高知觉负载下的注意捕获效应显著低于低负载, 即知觉负载能够显著影响其注意捕获能力, 表明负性面孔在实验一中的效应应归因于其本身携带的生态信息。由此, 本研究展示了具有生态意义的视觉刺激能够得到视觉系统的自动化加工。     

注意捕获对注意瞬脱的消弱作用

本研究在经典的注意瞬脱研究范式中变化干扰刺激T2-1或目标刺激T2的颜色特征,探究由新异刺激特征引发的注意捕获对注意瞬脱的影响。结果发现,当改变T2-1或T2的颜色时,这些与任务无关的新异信息可以自下而上地引发注意捕获并减小注意瞬脱。注意瞬脱起因于有限注意资源的分配,资源的分配方式受注意捕获的自动调节。这为解决注意瞬脱到底是有限资源限制还是资源分配提供了新的实证和理论解释。     

Stimulus-driven and goal-driven effects on Pavlovian associative reward learning

It has been shown that pure Pavlovian associative reward learning can elicit value-driven attentional capture. However, in previous studies, task-irrelevant and response-independent reward-signalling stimuli hardly competed for visual selective attention. Here we put Pavlovian reward learning to the test by manipulating the extent to which bottom-up (Experiment 1) and top-down (Experiment 2) processes were involved in this type of learning. In Experiment 1, the stimulus, the colour of which signalled the magnitude of the reward given, was presented simultaneously with another randomly coloured stimulus, so that it did not capture attention in a stimulus-driven manner. In Experiment 2, observers performed an attentionally demanding RSVP-task at the centre of the screen to largely tax goal-driven attentional resources, while a task-irrelevant and response-independent stimulus in the periphery signalled the magnitude of the reward given. Both experiments showed value-driven attentional capture in a non-reward test phase, indicating that the reward-signalling stimuli were imbued with value during the Pavlovian reward conditioning phases. This suggests that pure Pavlovian reward conditioning can occur even when (1) competition prevents attention being automatically allocated to the reward-signalling stimulus in a stimulus-driven manner, and (2) attention is occupied by a demanding task, leaving little goal-driven attentional resources available to strategically select the reward-signalling stimulus. The observed value-driven attentional capture effects appeared to be similar for observers who could and could not explicitly report the stimulus–reward contingencies. Altogether, this study provides insight in the conditions under which mere stimulus–reward contingencies in the environment can be learned to affect future behaviour.     

Reduced Value-Driven Attentional Capture Among Children with ADHD Compared to Typically Developing Controls

The current study examined whether children with ADHD were more distracted by a stimulus previously associated with reward, but currently goal-irrelevant, than their typically-developing peers. In addition, we also probed the associated cognitive and motivational mechanisms by examining correlations with other behavioral tasks. Participants included 8–12 year-old children with ADHD (n = 30) and typically developing controls (n = 26). Children were instructed to visually search for color-defined targets and received monetary rewards for accurate responses. In a subsequent search task in which color was explicitly irrelevant, we manipulated whether a distractor item appeared in a previously reward-associated color. We examined whether children responded more slowly on trials with the previously-rewarded distractor present compared to trials without this distractor, a phenomenon referred to as value-driven attentional capture (VDAC), and whether children with and without ADHD differed in the extent to which they displayed VDAC. Correlations among working memory performance, immediate reward preference (delay discounting) and attentional capture were also examined. Children with ADHD were significantly less affected by the presence of the previously rewarded distractor than were control participants. Within the ADHD group, greater value-driven attentional capture was associated with poorer working memory. Although both ADHD and control participants were initially distracted by previously reward-associated stimuli, the magnitude of distraction was larger and persisted longer among control participants.     

Made you blink! Contingent attentional capture produces a spatial blink

Previous studies have shown that the capture of attention by an irrelevant stimulus can be eliminated by fore knowledge of the spatial location of the relevant target stimulus. To explore whether spatial certainty is sufficient to eliminate capture, four experiments are reported in which the spatial location of the target is certain but the temporal position is uncertain. Subjects viewed a central rapid serial visual presentation stream in which a target letter was defined by a particular color (e.g., red). On critical trials, irrelevant color singletons appeared in the periphery. In Experiments 1 and 2, peripheral singletons produced a decrement in central target identification that was contingent on the match between the singleton color and the target color. Experiments 3 and 4 provided evidence that this decrement reflected a shift of spatial attention to the location of the distractor. The results suggest that spatial certainty is not sufficient to eliminate attentional capture and that attentional capture can result in a spatial "blink" that is conditional on top-down attentional control settings.     

Pavlovian reward learning underlies value driven attentional capture

Recent evidence shows that distractors that signal high compared to low reward availability elicit stronger attentional capture, even when this is detrimental for task-performance. This suggests that simply correlating stimuli with reward administration, rather than their instrumental relationship with obtaining reward, produces value-driven attentional capture. However, in previous studies, reward delivery was never response independent, as only correct responses were rewarded, nor was it completely task-irrelevant, as the distractor signaled the magnitude of reward that could be earned on that trial. In two experiments, we ensured that associative reward learning was completely response independent by letting participants perform a task at fixation, while high and low rewards were automatically administered following the presentation of task-irrelevant colored stimuli in the periphery (Experiment 1) or at fixation (Experiment 2). In a following non-reward test phase, using the additional singleton paradigm, the previously reward signaling stimuli were presented as distractors to assess truly task-irrelevant value driven attentional capture. The results showed that high compared to low reward-value associated distractors impaired performance, and thus captured attention more strongly. This suggests that genuine Pavlovian conditioning of stimulus-reward contingencies is sufficient to obtain value-driven attentional capture. Furthermore, value-driven attentional capture can occur following associative reward learning of temporally and spatially task-irrelevant distractors that signal the magnitude of available reward (Experiment 1), and is independent of training spatial shifts of attention towards the reward signaling stimuli (Experiment 2). This confirms and strengthens the idea that Pavlovian reward learning underlies value driven attentional capture.     

Assessing the role of accuracy-based feedback in value-driven attentional capture

Despite being physically nonsalient and task-irrelevant, objects rendered in a color that once signaled monetary reward reflexively capture attention during visual search, a phenomenon known as value-driven attentional capture (VDAC). However, it remains a subject of empirical controversy whether learned reward associations are necessary to driving subsequent attentional capture: VDAC-like effects have been observed when accuracy-based feedback alone was used during the VDAC training phase, resulting in attentional capture by objects that were never associated with monetary reward; perplexingly, the presence of these VDAC-like effects in the literature conflicts with those of a number of control studies in which no such capture has been observed, leaving the issue currently unresolved. In this Registered Report, we present new empirical evidence of attentional capture by unrewarded former targets following limited accuracy-based training. We proposed to replicate these results in an independent sample and to test an empirically derived hypothesis concerning a methodological difference between the studies that have shown VDAC-like effects with accuracy-based feedback and those that have not. In short, we found no evidence that this methodological difference accounts for the inconsistencies in the literature, but our replication efforts were overwhelmingly successful, thus reinvigorating debate about the role that selection history may play in value-driven attentional capture.     

Valuable orientations capture attention

Visual attention has long been known to be drawn to stimuli that are physically salient or congruent with task-specific goals. Several recent studies have shown that attention is also captured by stimuli that are neither salient nor task relevant, but that are rendered in a colour that has previously been associated with reward. We investigated whether another feature dimension—orientation—can be associated with reward via learning and thereby elicit value-driven attentional capture. In a training phase, participants received a monetary reward for identifying the colour of Gabor patches exhibiting one of two target orientations. A subsequent test phase in which no reward was delivered required participants to search for Gabor patches exhibiting one of two spatial frequencies (orientation was now irrelevant to the task). Previously rewarded orientations robustly captured attention. We conclude that reward learning can imbue features other than colour—in this case, specific orientations—with persistent value.     

Don’t let it distract you: how information about the availability of reward affects attentional selection

Previous research has shown that attentional selection is affected by reward contingencies: previously selected and rewarded stimuli continue to capture attention even if the reward contingencies are no longer in place. In the current study, we investigated whether attentional selection also is affected by stimuli that merely signal the magnitude of reward available on a given trial but, crucially, have never had instrumental value. In a series of experiments, we show that a stimulus signaling high reward availability captures attention even when that stimulus is and was never physically salient or part of the task set, and selecting it is harmful for obtaining reward. Our results suggest that irrelevant reward-signaling stimuli capture attention, because participants have learned about the relationship between the stimulus and reward. Importantly, we only observed learning after initial attentional prioritization of the reward signaling stimulus. We conclude that nonsalient, task-irrelevant but reward-signaling stimuli can affect attentional selection above and beyond top-down or bottom-up attentional control, however, only after such stimuli were initially prioritized for selection.     

Reward history but not search history explains value-driven attentional capture

In past years, an extensive amount of research has focused on how past experiences guide future attention. Humans automatically attend to stimuli previously associated with reward and stimuli that have been experienced during visual search, even when it is disadvantageous in present situations. Recently, the relationship between “reward history” and “search history” has been discussed critically. We review results from research on value-driven attentional capture (VDAC) with a focus on these two experience-based attentional selection processes and their distinction. To clarify inconsistencies, we examined VDAC within a design that allows a direct comparison with other mechanisms of attentional selection. Eighty-four healthy adults were trained to incidentally associate colors with reward (10 cents, 2 cents) or with no reward. In a subsequent visual search task, distraction by reward-associated and unrewarded stimuli was contrasted. In the training phase, reward signals facilitated performance. When these value-signaling stimuli appeared as distractors in the test phase, they continuously shaped attentional selection, despite their task irrelevance. Our findings clearly cannot be attributed to a history of target search. We conclude that once an association is established, value signals guide attention automatically in new situations, which can be beneficial or not, depending on the congruency with current goals.