Persistence of value-modulated attentional capture is associated with risky alcohol use

Albertella, Lucy; Watson, Poppy; Yücel, Murat; Pelley, Mike E. Le

doi:10.1016/j.abrep.2019.100195

“…Consistent with this finding, our meta-analysis shows that reward-driven distraction can emerge despite instructions to ignore distractors. Taken together, in line with previous theorizing (Albertella, Watson, et al, 2019;Anderson, 2016d), our meta-analysis illustrates that the literature on reward-driven distraction can provide effective tools to better understand attentional bias in addiction. In future research, these tools may prove helpful to examine other deficits in impulse control as well (see .…”

Section: Attentional Bias In Addictionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Reward-driven distraction: A meta-analysis.

Rusz

¹

,

Pelley²,

Kompier

³

et al. 2020

Psychological Bulletin

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People have a strong tendency to attend to reward cues, even if these cues are irrelevant to their current goal or their current task. When reward cues are goal-irrelevant, their presence may impair cognitive performance. In this meta-analysis, we quantitatively examined the rapidly growing literature on the impact of reward-related distractors on cognitive performance. We included 91 studies (N = 2,362) that used different cognitive paradigms (e.g., visual search, conflict processing) and reward-related stimuli (e.g., money, attractive food). Overall, results showed that reward-related distractors impaired cognitive performance across different tasks and stimuli, with a small effect size (Standardized Mean Change = .347). Between-study heterogeneity was large, suggesting that researchers can plausibly expect to sometimes find reversed effects (i.e., reward-related distractors boosting performance). We further showed that the average reward-driven distraction effect was robust across different reward-learning mechanisms, contexts, and methodological choices, and that this effect existed regardless of explicit task instructions to ignore distractors. In sum, the findings of this meta-analysis support the notion that cognitive processes can be thwarted by reward cues. We discuss these findings against the background of distraction-related phenomena as they are studied in clinical, educational, and work psychology.

show abstract

“…First, attentional bias in addiction is known to persist even when it is no longer frequently rewarded (e.g., in people who have learned to abstain; Stormark, Field, Hugdahl, & Horowitz, 1997 our meta-analysis shows that reward-driven distraction can emerge despite instructions to ignore distractors. Taken together, in line with previous theorizing (Albertella, Watson, et al, 2019;Anderson, 2016d), our meta-analysis illustrates that the literature on reward-driven distraction can provide effective tools to better understand attentional bias in addiction. In future research, these tools may prove helpful to examine other deficits in impulse control as well (see .…”

Section: Attentional Bias In Addictionsupporting

confidence: 84%

Reward-driven distraction: A meta-analysis

Rusz¹,

Pelley²,

Kompier³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People have a strong tendency to attend to reward cues, even if these cues are irrelevant to their current goal or their current task. When reward cues are goal-irrelevant, their presence may impair cognitive performance. In this meta-analysis, we quantitatively examined the rapidly growing literature on the impact of reward-related distractors on cognitive performance. We included 91 studies (N = 2,362) that used different cognitive paradigms (e.g., visual search, conflict processing) and reward-related stimuli (e.g., money, attractive food). Overall, results showed that reward-related distractors impaired cognitive performance across different tasks and stimuli, with a small effect size (Standardized Mean Change = .347). Between-study heterogeneity was large, suggesting that researchers can plausibly expect to sometimes find reversed effects (i.e., reward-related distractors boosting performance). We further showed that the average reward-driven distraction effect was robust across different reward-learning mechanisms, contexts, and methodological choices, and that this effect existed regardless of explicit task instructions to ignore distractors. In sum, the findings of this meta-analysis support the notion that cognitive processes can be thwarted by reward cues. We discuss these findings against the background of distraction-related phenomena as they are studied in clinical, educational, and work psychology.

show abstract

“…Consistent with previous findings Albertella, Watson, et al, 2019;Le Pelley et al, 2015;, responding to the target in Experiment 1 was significantly slower (but no more accurate) when the search display contained a high-value distractor than when it contained a low-value distractor. This implies that participants were more likely to attend to the high-value distractor, thus interfering with search for the target.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Reward learning and statistical learning independently influence attentional priority of salient distractors in visual search

Pelley¹,

Watson²,

Theeuwes³

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Existing research demonstrates different ways in which attentional prioritisation of visual stimuli is shaped by prior experience: reward learning renders signals of high-value outcomes more likely to capture attention than signals of low-value outcomes, whereas statistical learning can produce attentional suppression of the location in which salient distractor items are likely to appear. The current study combined manipulations of the value and location associated with distractors in visual search to investigate whether these different effects of selection history operate independently, or interact to determine overall attentional prioritisation of salient distractors. In Experiment 1, high- and low-value distractors most frequently appeared in the same location; in Experiment 2, high- and low-value distractors typically appeared in distinct locations. In both experiments, effects of distractor value and location were additive, suggesting that attention-promoting effects of value and attention-suppressing effects of physical salience independently modulate overall attentional priority. Our findings are consistent with a view that sees attention as mediated by a common priority map that receives and integrates separate signals relating to physical salience and value.

show abstract

Persistence of value-modulated attentional capture is associated with risky alcohol use

Cited by 48 publications

References 41 publications

Reward-driven distraction: A meta-analysis.

Reward-driven distraction: A meta-analysis.

Reward-driven distraction: A meta-analysis

Reward learning and statistical learning independently influence attentional priority of salient distractors in visual search

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About