Cited by 242Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesVisual Attention and Saliency DetectionVisual perception and processing mechanisms

Monetary Incentives Enhance Processing in Brain Regions Mediating Top-down Control of Attention

Small, Dana M., Gitelman, Darren, Simmons, Katharine, Bloise, Suzanne M., Parrish, Todd, Mesulam, M.-Marsel·2005·Cerebral Cortex

Abstract

To evaluate the effect of an abstract motivational incentive on top-down mechanisms of visual spatial attention, 10 subjects engaged in a target detection task and responded to targets preceded by spatially valid (predictive), invalid (misleading) or neutral central cues under three different incentive conditions: win money (WIN), lose money (LOSE), and neutral (neither gain nor lose). Activation in the posterior cingulate cortex was correlated with visual spatial expectancy, defined as the degree to which the valid cue benefited performance as evidenced by faster reaction times compared to non-directional cues. Winning and losing money enhanced this relationship via overlapping but independent limbic mechanisms. In addition, activity in the inferior parietal lobule was correlated with disengagement (the degree to which invalid cues diminished performance). This relationship was also enhanced by monetary incentives. Finally, incentive enhanced the relationship of activation in the visual cortex to visual spatial expectancy and disengagement for both types of incentive (WIN and LOSE). These results show that abstract incentives enhance neural processing within the attention network in a process- and valence-selective manner. They also show that different cognitive and motivational mechanisms may produce a common effect upon unimodal cortices in order to enhance processing to serve the current behavioral goal.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/cercor/bhi063

Cites

62 of 62 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?

  • Small et al. (2005) observed widespread activations of task-specific regions in response to reward-signaling cues presented prior to a trial in an fMRI spatial cueing task.

    “For example, an fMRI study by Small et al. (2005), which used a spatial cueing task, observed widespread activations of task-specific regions in response to reward-signaling cues presented prior to a given trial.”

    From Selection history: How reward modulates selectivity of visual attention. (2018) · cites this paper as Small et al., 2005

  • Many brain areas considered important in orienting visuospatial attention showed increased activity when reward was at stake.

    “As would be expected from a cueing task, many brain areas considered to be important in the orienting of visuospatial attention showed increased activity when reward was at stake.”

    From Selection history: How reward modulates selectivity of visual attention. (2018) · cites this paper as Small et al., 2005

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Small, D. M., Gitelman, D., Simmons, K., Bloise, S. M., Parrish, T., & Mesulam, M.-M.
Affiliations
Northwestern University (US)
Corresponding author
Small, Dana M.
Venue
Cerebral Cortex
Published
2005-03-02
Volume
15
Issue
12
Pages
1855-1865
ISSN
  • 1047-3211 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2199
OpenAlex
W2155276969
Cited by
242
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 19
FWCI
4.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cerebral Cortex (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Aging (AG13854, K23AG000940, K23AG00940-04, P30AG013854)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NS3086303, R01NS030863)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
Keywords
financial incentives, visuospatial attention, posterior cingulate cortex, inferior parietal lobule, attentional disengagement, reward valence, visual cortex, cue validity
MeSH terms
Adult, Attention, Brain, Eye Movements, Female, Frontal Lobe, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Motivation, Parietal Lobe, Psychomotor Performance, Psychophysics, Reward, Space Perception, Thalamus, Visual Cortex

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