Does self-prioritization affect perceptual processes?

Reuther, Josephine; Chakravarthi, Ramakrishna

doi:10.1080/13506285.2017.1323813

Cited by 37 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Inter-estingly, no differences in the efficiency of stimulus processing were observed as a function of ownership. Together with related research, this reveals that, rather than enhancing stimulus salience, self-relevance expedites performance through its influence on post-perceptual (i.e., decisional) processing operations ( Miyakoshi et al, 2007 ; Reuther & Chakravarthi, 2017 ; Siebold et al, 2015 ; Stein et al, 2016 ; Wade & Vickery, 2018 ).…”

Section: Ownership and Decisional Processingmentioning

confidence: 52%

“…The putative exclusivity of the self-ownership effect derives, at least in part, from its underlying origin. Despite the contention that self-relevance facilitates perceptual processing ( Humphreys & Sui, 2016 ; Sui & Humphreys, 2015 , 2017 ; Sui & Rotshtein, 2019 ; but see Reuther & Chakravarthi, 2017 ), studies manipulating object ownership have garnered little support for this viewpoint. Instead, self-prioritisation has been traced to the operation of a different underlying mechanism—a response bias ( Constable et al, 2019 ).…”

Section: Ownership and Decisional Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

It’s not always about me: The effects of prior beliefs and stimulus prevalence on self–other prioritisation

Falbén

Golubickis

Wischerath

et al. 2020

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although self-relevance is widely acknowledged to enhance stimulus processing, the exclusivity of this effect remains open to question. In particular, in commonly adopted experimental paradigms, the prioritisation of self-relevant (vs. other-relevant) material may reflect the operation of a task-specific strategy rather than an obligatory facet of social-cognitive functioning. By changing basic aspects of the decisional context, it may therefore be possible to generate stimulus-prioritisation effects for targets other than the self. Based on the demonstration that ownership facilitates object categorisation (i.e., self-ownership effect), here we showed that stimulus prioritisation is sensitive to prior expectations about the prevalence of forthcoming objects (owned-by-self vs. owned-by-friend) and whether these beliefs are supported during the task. Under conditions of stimulus uncertainty (i.e., no prior beliefs), replicating previous research, objects were classified more rapidly when owned-by-self compared with owned-by-friend (Experiment 1). When, however, the frequency of stimulus presentation either confirmed (Experiment 2) or disconfirmed (Experiment 3) prior expectations, stimulus prioritisation was observed for the most prevalent objects regardless of their owner. A hierarchical drift diffusion model (HDDM) analysis further revealed that decisional bias was underpinned by differences in the evidential requirements of response generation. These findings underscore the flexibility of ownership effects (i.e., stimulus prioritisation) during object processing.

show abstract

Section: Ownership and Decisional Processingmentioning

confidence: 52%

Section: Ownership and Decisional Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

It’s not always about me: The effects of prior beliefs and stimulus prevalence on self–other prioritisation

Falbén

Golubickis

Wischerath

et al. 2020

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The results showed that if the pairings were matching, then participants were faster to judge self-associated than friend-or stranger-associated stimuli, suggesting that participants demonstrated a "self-prioritization effect" for arbitrary rapidly self-associated geometrical shapes. This effect was later replicated with geometrical shapes [22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34], other kinds of visual stimuli, such as Gabor patches [35], tilted lines [36], images of food [37], avatars [38], and faces [20,39], as well as with stimuli in other sensory modalities [40][41][42].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 82%

Stranger to my face: Top-down and bottom-up effects underlying prioritization of images of one’s face

Woźniak¹,

Hohwy²

2020

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent studies suggest that we rapidly and effortlessly associate neutral information with the self, leading to subsequent prioritization of this information in perception. However, the exact underlying processes behind these effects are not fully known. Here, we focus specifically on top-down and bottom-up processes involved in self-prioritization, and report results from three experiments involving face detection, using a sequential match-non-match task. Across the three experiments we asked participants to associate an unfamiliar face with the self (Experiment 1), to associate one's face with a stranger's name (Experiment 2), and to establish both associations simultaneously (Experiment 3). We found that while participants showed evidence of bottom-up prioritization of their real faces, they did not show such an effect for self-associated strangers' faces. However, the participants showed a robust selfrelated top-down effect; when presented with a self-related cue, they were later faster at classifying both subsequent correct and incorrect targets. Together, our results suggest that self-prioritization is underpinned by distinct top-down and bottom-up processes. We discuss our findings in the context of the proposal that the self acts as an "integrative glue", and suggest an interpretation of our results within the framework of predictive coding.

show abstract

“…This self-prioritization effect during perceptual matching is maintained throughout the life span (Sui & Humphreys, 2017). Additional findings indicate that self-association modulates access to visual awareness under continuous flash suppression , and the effects are more pronounced in explicit (e.g., self-relevant) than implicit tasks (e.g., self-irrelevant, judging the orientation of stimuli; Falbén et al, 2019;Reuther & Chakravarthi, 2017). Evidence from mathematical modeling analysis has further shown that self-association changes particular functional processes Sui, Enock, Ralph, & Humphreys, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Good Me Bad Me: Prioritization of the Good-Self During Perceptual Decision-Making

Chuan-Peng

Lan

Macrae

2020

Collabra: Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People display systematic priorities to self-related stimuli. As the self is not a unified entity, however, it remains unclear which aspects of the self are crucial to producing this stimulus prioritization. To explore this issue, we manipulated the valence of the self-concept (good me vs. bad me) -a core identity-based facet of the self -using a standard shape-label association task in which participants initially learned the associations (e.g., circle/good-self, triangle/good-other, diamond/bad-self, square/bad-other), after which they completed shape-label matching and shape-categorization tasks, such that attention was directed to different aspects of the stimuli (i.e., self-relevance and valence). The results revealed that responses were more efficient to the good-self shape (vs. other shapes), regardless of the task that was undertaken. A hierarchical drift diffusion model (HDDM) analysis indicated that this good-self prioritization effect was underpinned by differences in the rate of information uptake. These findings demonstrate that activation of the good-self representation exclusively facilitates perceptual decision-making, thereby furthering understanding of the self-prioritization effect.

show abstract

Does self-prioritization affect perceptual processes?

Cited by 37 publications

References 54 publications

It’s not always about me: The effects of prior beliefs and stimulus prevalence on self–other prioritisation

It’s not always about me: The effects of prior beliefs and stimulus prevalence on self–other prioritisation

Stranger to my face: Top-down and bottom-up effects underlying prioritization of images of one’s face

Good Me Bad Me: Prioritization of the Good-Self During Perceptual Decision-Making

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About