4.5 Article

Motivated Suppression of Value- and Threat-Modulated Attentional Capture

期刊

EMOTION
卷 22, 期 4, 页码 780-794

出版社

AMER PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1037/emo0000777

关键词

associative learning; attentional capture; reward; signal suppression; threat

资金

  1. Brain and Behavior Research Foundation [26008]
  2. National Institute on Drug Abuse [R01-DA046410]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study examined the ability to suppress attentional bias towards reward or threat stimuli and found that it can be actively suppressed with sufficient motivation.
Attention prioritizes stimuli previously associated with reward or punishment. The present study examined whether this attentional bias, widely considered to be involuntary and automatic, could be suppressed with sufficient motivation. Participants performed visual search for a shape-defined target. One color-singleton distractor predicted the possibility of receiving a reward and another an electric shock, with each outcome occurring infrequently. Participants were informed that the likelihood to earn a reward or avert punishment depended on fast and accurate performance, thus providing strong motivation to resist distraction by reward- and shock-related stimuli. Results revealed a reduction in the magnitude of attentional capture by reward- and threat-associated distractors, relative to neutral distractors, that persisted into extinction. In a second experiment, we replicated the suppression of value-modulated attentional capture in the absence of the shock condition, thus confirming that the suppression did not result from the presence of threat. Finally, in a third experiment, we replicated the typical pattern of attentional capture by reward cues using a more conventional procedure in which the motivation to suppress valent stimuli was low (the likelihood to be rewarded was high and not contingent on fast performance). This study demonstrates that signals for reward and threat can be actively suppressed with sufficient motivation.

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

4.5
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