Cited by 313Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesVisual Attention and Saliency Detection

Does Imminent Threat Capture and Hold Attention?

Koster, Ernst H. W., Crombez, Geert, Van Damme, Stefaan, Verschuere, Bruno, De Houwer, Jan·2004·Emotion

Abstract

According to models of attention and emotion, threat captures and holds attention. In behavioral tasks, robust evidence has been found for attentional holding but not for attentional capture by threat. An important explanation for the absence of attentional capture effects is that the visual stimuli used posed no genuine threat. The present study investigated whether visual cues that signal an aversive white noise can elicit attentional capture and holding effects. Cues presented in an attentional task were simultaneously provided with a threat value through an aversive conditioning procedure. Response latencies showed that threatening cues captured and held attention. These results support recent views on attention to threat, proposing that imminent threat captures attention in everyone.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/1528-3542.4.3.312

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • After association with an aversive event, initially neutral cues caused both facilitated attentional engagement and delayed disengagement.

    “Other studies showed that after the association with an aversive event, initially neutral cues caused both facilitated attentional engagement (Koster, Crombez, van Damme, Verschuere, & de Houwer, 2004) and delayed disengagement (Preciado et al., 2017; van Damme, Crombez, & Notebaert, 2008).”

    From Selection history: How reward modulates selectivity of visual attention. (2018) · cites this paper as Koster, Crombez, van Damme, Verschuere, & de Houwer, 2004

  • During many, if not all, fear-conditioning experiments, participants were instructed or encouraged to attend the threat-related stimulus either because it was part of the task or because it was part of the pre-experimental conditioning session.

    “Even though these studies demonstrated a strong bias in selecting threat-signaling stimuli, it should be realized that during many, if not all, of these experiments, participants were instructed or encouraged to attend the threat-related stimulus either because it was part of the task (e.g., Koster et al., 2004) or because it was part of the pre-experimental conditioning session (e.g., Mulckhuyse,”

    From Selection history: How reward modulates selectivity of visual attention. (2018) · cites this paper as Koster et al., 2004

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Koster, E. H. W., Crombez, G., Van Damme, S., Verschuere, B., & De Houwer, J.
Affiliations
Ghent University (BE)
Venue
Emotion
Published
2004
Volume
4
Issue
3
Pages
312-317
ISSN
  • 1528-3542 (ISSN-L)
  • 1931-1516
OpenAlex
W2014431249
Cited by
312
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 21
FWCI
5.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Emotion (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
Keywords
attentional capture, threats, aversive conditioning, threat value, visual cues, white noise, response latency, emotion and attention
MeSH terms
Attention, Cues, Facial Expression, Humans, Reaction Time, Visual Perception

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review