The DOI matches its Crossref record; 79 of the 79 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Combined effects of attention and motivation on visual task performance: Transient and sustained motivational effects
Open accessAbstract
We investigated how the brain integrates motivational and attentional signals by using a neuroimaging paradigm that provided separate estimates for transient cue- and target-related signals, in addition to sustained block-related responses. Participants performed a Posner-type task in which an endogenous cue predicted target location on 70% of trials, while motivation was manipulated by varying magnitude and valence of a cash incentive linked to task performance. Our findings revealed increased detection performance (d') as a function of incentive value. In parallel, brain signals revealed that increases in absolute incentive magnitude led to cue- and target-specific response modulations that were independent of sustained state effects across visual cortex, fronto-parietal regions, and subcortical regions. Interestingly, state-like effects of incentive were observed in several of these brain regions, too, suggesting that both transient and sustained fMRI signals may contribute to task performance. For both cue and block periods, the effects of administering incentives were correlated with individual trait measures of reward sensitivity. Taken together, our findings support the notion that motivation improves behavioral performance in a demanding attention task by enhancing evoked responses across a distributed set of anatomical sites, many of which have been previously implicated in attentional processing. However, the effect of motivation was not simply additive as the impact of absolute incentive was greater during invalid than valid trials in several brain regions, possibly because motivation had a larger effect on reorienting than orienting attentional mechanisms at these sites.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“studies by Pessoa and colleagues demonstrated that incentive reward evoked activity in large distributed brain networks, particularly those associated with attention and dopamine release (Engelmann et al., 2009; Padmala & Pessoa, 2011; for a review, see Pessoa & Engelmann, 2010).”
From Selection history: How reward modulates selectivity of visual attention. (2018) · cites this paper as Engelmann et al., 2009
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
(1998) · The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry · Cited by 19,139
Co-Planar Stereotaxic Atlas of the Human Brain
Talairach, J., & Tournoux, P. (1988) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 11,798
AFNI: Software for analysis and visualization of functional magnetic resonance neuroimages
Cox, R. W. (1996) · Computers and Biomedical Research · doi:10.1006/cbmr.1996.0014 · Cited by 10,913
(1966) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 10,293
(1998) · PubMed · Cited by 10,216
Signal detection theory and psychophysics
Ingleby, D. (1967) · Journal of Sound and Vibration · doi:10.1016/0022-460x(67)90197-6 · Cited by 8,616
Parallel organization of functionally segregated circuits linking basal ganglia and cortex
Alexander, G. E., DeLong, M. R., & Strick, P. L. (1986) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev.ne.09.030186.002041 · Cited by 8,527
Co-planar stereotaxic atlas of the human brain
Laitinen, L. (1989) · Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery · doi:10.1016/0303-8467(89)90128-5 · Cited by 7,565
Carver, C. S., & White, T. L. (1994) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.67.2.319 · Cited by 7,306
Spontaneous fluctuations in brain activity observed with functional magnetic resonance imaging
Fox, M. D., & Raichle, M. E. (2007) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn2201 · Cited by 6,700
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Function in the human connectome: task-fMRI and individual differences in behavior
Barch, D. M., Burgess, G. C., Harms, M. P., Petersen, S. E., Schlaggar, B. L., Corbetta, M., Glasser, M. F., Curtiss, S., Dixit, S., Feldt, C., et al. (2013) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.05.033 · Cited by 1,529
Toward a rational and mechanistic account of mental effort
Shenhav, A., Musslick, S., Lieder, F., Kool, W., Griffiths, T. L., Cohen, J. D., & Botvinick, M. M. (2017) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev-neuro-072116-031526 · Cited by 1,077
Motivation and cognitive control: from behavior to neural mechanism
Botvinick, M., & Braver, T. (2015) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010814-015044 · Cited by 909
Mechanisms of motivation–cognition interaction: challenges and opportunities
Braver, T. S., Krug, M. K., Chiew, K. S., Kool, W., Westbrook, J. A., Clement, N. J., Adcock, R. A., Barch, D. M., Botvinick, M., Carver, C. S., et al. (2014) · Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3758/s13415-014-0300-0 · Cited by 452
Selection history: How reward modulates selectivity of visual attention.
Failing, M., & Theeuwes, J. (2018) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-017-1380-y · Cited by 345
“…et al., 2005), studies by Pessoa and colleagues demonstrated that incentive reward evoked activity in large distributed brain networks, particularly those associated with attention and dopamine release (Engelmann et al., 2009; Padmala & Pessoa, 2011; for a review, see Pessoa & Engelmann, 2010).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Engelmann, J. B.
- Affiliations
- Emory University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Engelmann, Jan B.
- ORCID
- Engelmann, Jan B.
- Venue
- Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2009
- Volume
- 3
- Pages
- 4-4
- ISSN
- 1662-5161 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC2679199
- OpenAlex
- W2123949210
- Cited by
- 300
- References
- 78
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 37 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 13
- FWCI
- 6.96
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Frontiers in Human Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- American Psychological Association
- National Institute of Mental Health (MH071589, R01MH071589)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
- Keywords
- motivation, attention, incentive magnitude, reward sensitivity, Posner task, endogenous cueing, visual attention, sustained attention, reward valence, orienting, frontoparietal cortex, visual cortex, subcortical structures
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
