4.4 Article

Motivational Salience Guides Attention to Valuable and Threatening Stimuli: Evidence from Behavior and Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Journal

JOURNAL OF COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE
Volume 33, Issue 12, Pages 2440-2460

Publisher

MIT PRESS
DOI: 10.1162/jocn_a_01769

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Brain and Behavior Research Foundation [26008]
  2. National Institutes of Health [R01-DA046410]
  3. Texas A& M University Program to Enhance Scholarly and Creative Activities (PESCA) grant
  4. NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Rewarding and aversive outcomes have opposing effects on behavior, facilitating approach and avoidance. Attention is biased towards stimuli that have been learned to predict these outcomes. Studies overwhelmingly support the idea that attention is controlled by motivational salience.
Rewarding and aversive outcomes have opposing effects on behavior, facilitating approach and avoidance, although we need to accurately anticipate each type of outcome to behave effectively. Attention is biased toward stimuli that have been learned to predict either type of outcome, and it remains an open question whether such orienting is driven by separate systems for value- and threat-based orienting or whether there exists a common underlying mechanism of attentional control driven by motivational salience. Here, we provide a direct comparison of the neural correlates of value- and threat-based attentional capture after associative learning. Across multiple measures of behavior and brain activation, our findings overwhelmingly support a motivational salience account of the control of attention. We conclude that there exists a core mechanism of experience-dependent attentional control driven by motivational salience and that prior characterizations of attention as being value driven or supporting threat monitoring need to be revisited.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available