4.7 Review

The past, present, and future of selection history

期刊

NEUROSCIENCE AND BIOBEHAVIORAL REVIEWS
卷 130, 期 -, 页码 326-350

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.09.004

关键词

Selective attention; Attentional capture; Associative learning; Habit learning; Selection history

资金

  1. NIH [R01-DA046410]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The proposal of selection history as a distinct mechanism of attentional control marks a revolution in attention research, replacing a theoretical dichotomy with a trichotomy. This new mechanism is multifaceted, with different components shaped by various learning experiences such as reward and past experience. Relationships between these components are explored in depth, leading to an integrative account centered on underlying themes.
The last ten years of attention research have witnessed a revolution, replacing a theoretical dichotomy (top-down vs. bottom-up control) with a trichotomy (biased by current goals, physical salience, and selection history). This third new mechanism of attentional control, selection history, is multifaceted. Some aspects of selection history must be learned over time whereas others reflect much more transient influences. A variety of different learning experiences can shape the attention system, including reward, aversive outcomes, past experience searching for a target, target-non-target relations, and more. In this review, we provide an overview of the historical forces that led to the proposal of selection history as a distinct mechanism of attentional control. We then propose a formal definition of selection history, with concrete criteria, and identify different components of experience-driven attention that fit within this definition. The bulk of the review is devoted to exploring how these different components relate to one another. We conclude by proposing an integrative account of selection history centered on underlying themes that emerge from our review.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据