Selective attention moderates the relationship between attentional capture by signals of nondrug reward and illicit drug use

Albertella, Lucy; Copeland, Jan; Pearson, Daniel; Watson, Poppy; Wiers, Reinout W.; Pelley, Mike E. Le

doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2017.01.041

Cited by 45 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If so, individual preferences for fast versus slow decision-making can be expected to translate into individual differences regarding socially appropriate behavior, including substance abuse [76][77][78][79]. And yet, that does not imply that individuals with supposedly "weaker executive functions" (or less persistence in decision-making) are unable to translate their intentions into action, they just prefer making quick decisions based on salient cues [80,81]. In conclusion, while the intentional/automatic dichotomy might keep serving a useful descriptive role, we suggest that the underlying processes are best captured by a unitary model as outlined here.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a Unitary Approach to Human Action Control

Hommel

Wiers

2017

Trends in Cognitive Sciences

Self Cite

187

134

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From its academic beginnings the theory of human action control has distinguished between endogenously driven, intentional action and exogenously driven, habitual, or automatic action. We challenge this dual-route model and argue that attempts to provide clear-cut and straightforward criteria to distinguish between intentional and automatic action have systematically failed. Specifically, we show that there is no evidence for intention-independent action, and that attempts to use the criterion of reward sensitivity and rationality to differentiate between intentional and automatic action are conceptually unsound. As a more parsimonious, and more feasible, alternative we suggest a unitary approach to action control, according to which actions are (i) represented by codes of their perceptual effects, (ii) selected by matching intention-sensitive selection criteria, and (ii) moderated by metacontrol states.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a Unitary Approach to Human Action Control

Hommel

Wiers

2017

Trends in Cognitive Sciences

Self Cite

187

134

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recent evidence suggests that the processes underlying VMAC are closely related to the REWARD OVERCOMES ATTENTIONAL SUPPRESSION 7 attentional biases towards drug-related stimuli observed in addiction (Albertella et al, 2017(Albertella et al, , 2019Albertella, Le Pelley, et al, 2019;Anderson, Faulkner, Rilee, Yantis, & Marvel, 2013; for review see Field & Cox, 2008), which can promote relapse in recovering addicts (Marhe, Waters, Wetering, & Franken, 2013;Marissen et al, 2006;Waters, Marhe, & Franken, 2012).…”

Section: The Role Of Selection History In Guiding Attentionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Overt attentional capture by reward-related stimuli overcomes inhibitory suppression.

Pearson¹,

Watson²,

Cheng³

et al. 2020

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Salient-but-irrelevant distractors can automatically capture attention and eye-gaze in visual search. However, recent findings have suggested that attention to salient-but-irrelevant stimuli can be suppressed when observers use a specific target template to guide their search (i.e., feature search). A separate line of research has indicated that attentional selection is influenced by factors other than the physical salience of a stimulus and the observer's goals.For instance, pairing a stimulus with reward has been shown to increase the extent to which it captures attention and gaze (as though it has become more physically salient), even when such capture has negative consequences for the observer. Here we used eye-tracking with a rewarded visual search task to investigate whether capture by reward can be suppressed in the same way as capture by physical salience. When participants were encouraged to use feature search, attention to a distractor paired with relatively small reward was suppressed. However, under the same conditions attention was captured by a distractor paired with large reward, even when such capture resulted in reward omission. These findings suggest that reward-related stimuli are given special priority within the visual attention system over and above physically-salient stimuli, and have implications for our understanding of real-world biases to reward-related stimuli, such as those seen in addiction.Word count: 8515 REWARD OVERCOMES ATTENTIONAL SUPPRESSION 3 Overt attentional capture by reward-related stimuli overcomes inhibitory suppression

show abstract

“…On this latter point, we note that there are existing studies that have investigated how reward-driven distraction relates to real-life settings. However, these studies mainly focused on reward-driven distraction's role in the development of psychopathologies, such as substance abuse (Albertella et al, 2017;Anderson, Kronemer, et al, 2016) and depression (Anderson, Leal, et al, 2014). It remains an open question, though, whether these findings extend to healthy individuals in educational and occupational performance settingsan area that is unexplored in the reward-driven distraction literature.…”

Section: Aim 1: To Establish the Magnitude And Scope Of Reward-drivenmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Selective attention moderates the relationship between attentional capture by signals of nondrug reward and illicit drug use

Cited by 45 publications

References 36 publications

Towards a Unitary Approach to Human Action Control

Towards a Unitary Approach to Human Action Control

Overt attentional capture by reward-related stimuli overcomes inhibitory suppression.

Reward-driven distraction: A meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About