Novelty competes with saliency for attention

Ernst, Daniel; Becker, Stefanie I.; Horstmann, Gernot

doi:10.1016/j.visres.2020.01.004

Cited by 39 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 76 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…While this result is contrary to some previous research examining the effects of expectation on access to awareness (e.g. Pinto et al, 2015), it is consistent with reports of greater attentional capture for the first unannounced presentation of novel cues (Al-Aidroos, Guo, & Pratt, 2010;Becker & Horstmann, 2011;Ernst, Becker, & Horstmann, 2020;cf. Meijs, Klaassen, Bokeria, Van Gaal, & de Lange, 2018).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 54%

Sensorimotor predictions shape reported conscious visual experience in a breaking Continuous Flash Suppression task

Skora¹,

Seth²,

Scott³

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A growing body of work suggests that conscious experience and action are strongly intertwined. Recent accounts of predictive processing propose that conscious experience is influenced not only by passive predictions about the world, but also by predictions encompassing how the world changes in relation to our actions – that is, on predictions about sensorimotor contingencies. In this light, action emerges as an integral part of our experience of the world, shaping it in line with sensorimotor predictions.Motivated by this proposal, we tested the idea that valid sensorimotor predictions, such as learned associations between a stimulus and an action, shape conscious visual experience. We performed two experiments, leveraging instrumental conditioning to build sensorimotor predictions, linking distinct stimuli with simple actions (an index finger and little finger button press). Conditioning was immediately followed by a breaking continuous flash suppression (bCFS) task, measuring the speed of breakthrough into conscious awareness for different pairings between the stimulus and the prepared action; where the prepared action was congruent with the sensorimotor prediction, where it was incongruent with the sensorimotor prediction, where no action was associated with the stimulus, and where the stimulus had not previously been encountered (novel). In Experiment 1, counterbalancing of the bCFS task was achieved at the block level by having the same prepared action for each trial within a block, with action only differing between blocks. However, requiring repetition of the action within a block may have limited the action’s predictive salience. Experiment 2 avoided this repetition by counterbalancing the prepared action within blocks, thus maximising the predictive salience of the action. Analysis was conducted using mixed-effects modelling to assess the speed of conscious perception in the bCFS task. In Experiment 1, while the breakthrough times were numerically shorter for congruent than incongruent pairings, the analysis supported the null hypothesis of no influence from the sensorimotor predictions. In Experiment 2, the speed of access to consciousness was significantly faster for congruent than for incongruent or no-action pairings. A meta-analytic Bayes factor combining the two experiments provided further confirmation of this effect. Hence, we provide direct evidence for a key implication of the action-oriented predictive processing approach to conscious perception, namely that sensorimotor predictions directly shape our conscious experience of the world.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 54%

Sensorimotor predictions shape reported conscious visual experience in a breaking Continuous Flash Suppression task

Skora¹,

Seth²,

Scott³

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, it is possible that the difference was accounted for by increased interference on low-probability positions, not by reduced interference at the high-probability position. Consistent with this argument, previous research has demonstrated that interference increased when distractors appeared only on a small number of trials (Geyer et al, 2008;Müller et al, 2009; see also Ernst et al, 2020). However, none of the previous studies compared interference between rare and frequent distractor positions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 78%

Statistical learning in visual search reflects distractor rarity, not only attentional suppression

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In visual search tasks, salient distractors may capture attention involuntarily, but interference can be reduced when the salient distractor appears more frequently on one out of several possible positions. The reduction was attributed to attentional suppression of the high-probability position. However, all previous studies on this topic compared performance on the high-probability position to the remaining positions, which had a low probability of containing the distractor. Therefore, it is not clear whether the difference resulted from reduced interference on the high-probability position or from increased interference on the low-probability positions. To decide between these alternatives, we compared high-probability and low-probability with equal-probability positions. Consistent with attentional suppression, interference was reduced on the high-probability position compared with equal-probability positions. However, there was also an increase in interference on low-probability positions compared with equal-probability positions. The increase is in line with previous reports of boosted interference when distractors are rare. Our results show that the experimental design used in previous research is insufficient to separate effects of attentional suppression and those of distractor rarity.

show abstract

“…Additionally, particularly in the pre-training assessment, the stimuli were new to the participants and the neutral pictures apparently drew more attention than the itch pictures. This may be related to the more heterogeneous content of the neutral (various objects) than the itch pictures (scratching hand), making the neutral pictures more novel ( 51 ). It may be worthwhile to explore if the attention increase to the itch pictures would still occur when presenting stimuli subliminally.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attentional Bias Modification Training for Itch: A Proof-of-Principle Study in Healthy Individuals

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Itch draws our attention to allow imposing action against bodily harm (e.g., remove insects). At the same time, itch is found to interfere with ongoing tasks and daily life goals. Despite the key role of attention in itch processing, interventions that train individuals to automatically disengage attention from itch cues are lacking. The present proof-of-principle attention bias modification (ABM) training study was aimed at investigating whether attention to itch as well as sensitivity to mild itch can be changed. Healthy volunteers were randomized over three ABM-training conditions. Training was done via a modified pictorial dot-probe task. In particular, participants were trained to look away from itch stimuli (n = 38), toward itch stimuli (n = 40) or not trained toward or away from itch at all (sham training, n = 38). The effects of the ABM-training were tested primarily on attention to itch pictures. Secondarily, it was investigated whether training effects generalized to alterations in attention to itch words and mechanical itch sensitivity. The ABM-training did not alter attention toward the itch pictures, and there was no moderation by baseline levels of attention bias for itch. Also, attention bias to the itch words and itch sensitivity were not affected by the ABM-training. This study was a first step toward trainings to change attention toward itch. Further research is warranted to optimize ABM-training methodology, for example increasing motivation of participants. Eventually, an optimized training could be used in patient populations who suffer most from distraction by their symptoms of itch.Clinical Trial Registration: Identifier: NL6134 (NTR6273). The website URL is: https://www.trialregister.nl/

show abstract

Novelty competes with saliency for attention

Cited by 39 publications

References 76 publications

Sensorimotor predictions shape reported conscious visual experience in a breaking Continuous Flash Suppression task

Sensorimotor predictions shape reported conscious visual experience in a breaking Continuous Flash Suppression task

Statistical learning in visual search reflects distractor rarity, not only attentional suppression

Attentional Bias Modification Training for Itch: A Proof-of-Principle Study in Healthy Individuals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About