CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 58Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesVisual Attention and Saliency DetectionVisual perception and processing mechanisms

Don’t let it distract you: how information about the availability of reward affects attentional selection

Open access
Failing, Michel, Theeuwes, Jan·2017·Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
DOI 10.3758/s13414-017-1376-8PMC PMC5662709
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Previous research has shown that attentional selection is affected by reward contingencies: previously selected and rewarded stimuli continue to capture attention even if the reward contingencies are no longer in place. In the current study, we investigated whether attentional selection also is affected by stimuli that merely signal the magnitude of reward available on a given trial but, crucially, have never had instrumental value. In a series of experiments, we show that a stimulus signaling high reward availability captures attention even when that stimulus is and was never physically salient or part of the task set, and selecting it is harmful for obtaining reward. Our results suggest that irrelevant reward-signaling stimuli capture attention, because participants have learned about the relationship between the stimulus and reward. Importantly, we only observed learning after initial attentional prioritization of the reward signaling stimulus. We conclude that nonsalient, task-irrelevant but reward-signaling stimuli can affect attentional selection above and beyond top-down or bottom-up attentional control, however, only after such stimuli were initially prioritized for selection.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3758/s13414-017-1376-8

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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 attentional bias toward the feature associated with reward changed gradually.

    “Instead, the attentional bias toward the feature associated with reward changed gradually (for comparable findings in the context of a task where reward-associated stimuli are never task-relevant, see Failing & Theeuwes, 2017).”

    From Selection history: How reward modulates selectivity of visual attention. (2018) · cites this paper as Failing & Theeuwes, 2017

  • Under some circumstances one may obtain attention biases without the need for specific attentional prioritization by means of top-down task-relevance or bottom-up salience.

    “Recent attempts have shown that under some circumstances one may obtain attention biases without the need for specific attentional prioritization by means of top-down task-relevance or bottom-up salience (e.g., Bucker & Theeuwes, 2017b; Failing et al., 2015; Failing & Theeuwes, 2017).”

    From Selection history: How reward modulates selectivity of visual attention. (2018) · cites this paper as Failing & Theeuwes, 2017

  • Other studies observed no such learning under conditions in which attentional suppression would have been the appropriate response that also would have led to more reward payout.

    “However, other studies observed no such learning under conditions in which attentional suppression would have been the appropriate response that also would have led to more reward payout.”

    From Selection history: How reward modulates selectivity of visual attention. (2018) · cites this paper as Failing & Theeuwes, 2017

  • These studies demonstrated that a reward-signaling stimulus demanded attention irrespective of it being detrimental to task performance and reward payout.

    “These studies instead demonstrated that a reward-signaling stimulus demanded attention irrespective of it being detrimental to task performance and reward payout (e.g., Le Pelley et al., 2015; Failing et al., 2015; Failing & Theeuwes, 2017).”

    From Selection history: How reward modulates selectivity of visual attention. (2018) · cites this paper as Failing & Theeuwes, 2017

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 59

  1. Anderson BA A value-driven mechanism of attentional selection Journal of Vision 2013 13 3 7 10.1167/13.3.7 23589803 PMC3630531 · DOI
  2. Anderson BA Yantis S Value-driven attentional and oculomotor capture during goal-directed, unconstrained viewing Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 2012 74 8 1644 1653 10.3758/s13414-012-0348-2 PMC3499680 22810561 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Anderson, B. A., Laurent, P. A., & Yantis, S. (2011). Value-driven attentional capture. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(25), 10367–10371. PMC3121816 21646524
  4. Anderson BA Laurent PA Yantis S Value-driven attentional priority signals in human basal ganglia and visual cortex Brain Research 2014 1587 88 96 10.1016/j.brainres.2014.08.062 25171805 PMC4253668 · DOI
  5. Awh E Belopolsky AV Theeuwes J Top-down versus bottom-up attentional control: A failed theoretical dichotomy Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2012 16 8 437 443 10.1016/j.tics.2012.06.010 22795563 PMC3426354 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Bacon WF Egeth H Overriding stimulus-driven attentional capture Perception & Psychophysics 1994 55 485 496 10.3758/BF03205306 8008550 · DOI
  7. Belopolsky, A. V., & Theeuwes, J. (2009). When are attention and saccade preparation dissociated?. Psychological Science, 20(11), 1340–1347. 19788530
  8. Corbetta M Patel G Shulman GL The reorienting system of the human brain: From environment to theory of mind Neuron 2008 58 3 306 324 10.1016/j.neuron.2008.04.017 18466742 PMC2441869 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Cousineau D Confidence intervals in within-subject designs: A simpler solution to Loftus and Masson’s method Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology 2005 1 1 42 45 10.20982/tqmp.01.1.p042 · DOI
  10. Della Libera C Chelazzi L Visual selective attention and the effects of monetary rewards Psychological Science 2006 17 3 222 227 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01689.x 16507062 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Della Libera C Chelazzi L Learning to attend and to ignore is a matter of gains and losses Psychological Science 2009 20 6 778 784 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02360.x 19422618 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Engelmann JB Pessoa L Motivation sharpens exogenous spatial attention Emotion 2007 7 3 668 10.1037/1528-3542.7.3.668 17683222 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Etzel, J. A., Cole, M. W., Zacks, J. M., Kay, K. N., & Braver, T. S. (2015). Reward motivation enhances task coding in frontoparietal cortex. Cerebral Cortex. PMC4785950 25601237
  14. Failing MF Theeuwes J Exogenous visual orienting by reward Journal of Vision 2014 14 5 6 10.1167/14.5.6 24819737 · DOI
  15. Failing MF Theeuwes J Nonspatial Attentional Capture by Previously Rewarded Scene Semantics Visual Cognition 2015 23 1-2 82 104 10.1080/13506285.2014.990546 · DOI
  16. Failing M Nissens T Pearson D Le Pelley M Theeuwes J Oculomotor capture by stimuli that signal the availability of reward Journal of Neurophysiology 2015 114 4 2316 2327 10.1152/jn.00441.2015 26289464 PMC4609761 · DOI
  17. Folk CL Remington RW Bottom-up priming of top-down attentional control settings Visual Cognition 2008 16 2-3 215 231 10.1080/13506280701458804 · DOI
  18. Folk CL Remington RW Wu SC Additivity of abrupt onset effects supports nonspatial distraction, not the capture of spatial attention Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 2009 71 2 308 313 10.3758/APP.71.2.308 19304620 · DOI
  19. Kahneman D Treisman A Burkell J The cost of visual filtering Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1983 9 4 510 6224889
  20. Kamin, L., J. (1969). Predictability, surprise, attention and conditioning. In B. A. Campbell & R. M. Church (Eds.), Punishment and aversive behaviour (pp. 279–296). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
  21. Kiss M Driver J Eimer M Reward priority of visual target singletons modulates event-related potential signatures of attentional selection Psychological Science 2009 20 2 245 251 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02281.x 19175756 PMC2645377 · DOI · Paper page
  22. Krebs RM Boehler CN Egner T Woldorff MG The neural underpinnings of how reward associations can both guide and misguide attention The Journal of Neuroscience 2011 31 26 9752 9759 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0732-11.2011 21715640 PMC3142621 · DOI
  23. Kristjánsson Á Sigurjónsdóttir Ó Driver J Fortune and reversals of fortune in visual search: Reward contingencies for pop-out targets affect search efficiency and target repetition effects Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 2010 72 5 1229 1236 10.3758/APP.72.5.1229 20601703 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Lahav A Makovski T Tsal Y White bear everywhere: Exploring the boundaries of the attentional white bear phenomenon Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 2012 74 4 661 673 10.3758/s13414-012-0275-2 22323061 · DOI
  25. Le Pelley, M. E. (2004). The role of associative history in models of associative learning: A selective review and a hybrid model. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section B, 57(3), 193–243. 15204108
  26. Logan GD Toward an instance theory of automatization Psychological Review 1988 95 4 492 10.1037/0033-295X.95.4.492 · DOI · Paper page
  27. Logan GD An instance theory of attention and memory Psychological Review 2002 109 2 376 10.1037/0033-295X.109.2.376 11990323 · DOI · Paper page
  28. Mackintosh NJ A theory of attention: Variations in the associability of stimuli with reinforcement Psychological Review 1975 82 4 276 10.1037/h0076778 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Mathôt S Schreij D Theeuwes J OpenSesame: An open-source, graphical experiment builder for the social sciences Behavior Research Methods 2012 44 2 314 324 10.3758/s13428-011-0168-7 22083660 PMC3356517 · DOI
  30. Medin DL Shaffner MM Context theory of classification Psychological Review 1978 85 207 238 10.1037/0033-295X.85.3.207 · DOI · Paper page
  31. Mine, C., & Saiki, J. (2015). Task-irrelevant stimulus-reward association induces value-driven attentional capture. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 77(6), 1896. 25893470
  32. Moors A Automaticity: Componential, causal, and mechanistic explanations Annual Review of Psychology 2016 67 263 287 10.1146/annurev-psych-122414-033550 26331343 · DOI · Paper page
  33. Morey RD Confidence intervals from normalized data: A correction to Cousineau (2005) Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology 2008 4 2 61 64 10.20982/tqmp.04.2.p061 · DOI
  34. Mulckhuyse M Theeuwes J Unconscious attentional orienting to exogenous cues: A review of the literature Acta Psychologica 2010 134 3 299 309 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.03.002 20378092 · DOI
  35. Nissen MJ Bullemer P Attentional requirements of learning: Evidence from performance measures Cognitive Psychology 1987 19 1 1 32 10.1016/0010-0285(87)90002-8 · DOI
  36. Padmala S Pessoa L Reward reduces conflict by enhancing attentional control and biasing visual cortical processing Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2011 23 11 3419 3432 10.1162/jocn_a_00011 21452938 PMC3175266 · DOI · Paper page
  37. Pearson D Donkin C Tran SC Most SB Le Pelley ME Cognitive control and counterproductive oculomotor capture by reward-related stimuli Visual Cognition 2015 23 1-2 41 66 10.1080/13506285.2014.994252 · DOI
  38. Pearson, D., Osborn, R., Whitford, T. J., Failing, M., Theeuwes, J., & Le Pelley, M. E. (2016). Value-modulated oculomotor capture by task-irrelevant stimuli is feature-specific. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, in press. doi:10.3758/s13414-016-1135-2 27184056 · DOI · Paper page
  39. Peck CJ Jangraw DC Suzuki M Efem R Gottlieb J Reward modulates attention independently of action value in posterior parietal cortex Journal of Neuroscience 2009 29 36 11182 11191 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1929-09.2009 19741125 PMC2778240 · DOI · Paper page
  40. Pessoa, L., & Engelmann, J. B. (2010). Embedding reward signals into perception and cognition. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 4. PMC2940450 20859524
  41. Pool E Brosch T Delplanque S Sander D Where is the chocolate? Rapid spatial orienting toward stimuli associated with primary rewards Cognition 2014 130 3 348 359 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.12.002 24389311 · DOI
  42. Raymond JE O'Brien JL Selective Visual Attention and Motivation The Consequences of Value Learning in an Attentional Blink Task Psychological Science 2009 20 8 981 988 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02391.x 19549080 · DOI
  43. Sali, A. W., Anderson, B. A., & Yantis, S. (2014). The role of reward prediction in the control of attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40(4), 1654 PMC4313538 24955700
  44. Sawaki R Luck SJ Raymond JE How attention changes in response to incentives Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2015 27 11 2229 2239 10.1162/jocn_a_00847 26151604 PMC4589447 · DOI · Paper page
  45. Schreij D Theeuwes J Olivers CN Abrupt onsets capture attention independent of top-down control settings II: Additivity is no evidence for filtering Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 2010 72 3 672 682 10.3758/APP.72.3.672 20348574 · DOI
  46. Small DM Gitelman D Simmons K Bloise SM Parrish T Mesulam MM Monetary incentives enhance processing in brain regions mediating top-down control of attention Cerebral Cortex 2005 15 12 1855 1865 10.1093/cercor/bhi063 15746002 · DOI · Paper page
  47. Theeuwes J Cross-dimensional perceptual selectivity Perception & Psychophysics 1991 50 2 184 193 10.3758/BF03212219 1945740 · DOI · Paper page
  48. Theeuwes J Stimulus-driven capture and attentional set: Selective search for color and visual abrupt onsets Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1994 20 4 799 8083635
  49. Theeuwes J Top–down and bottom–up control of visual selection Acta Psychologica 2010 135 2 77 99 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.02.006 20507828 · DOI · Paper page
  50. Theeuwes J Belopolsky AV Reward grabs the eye: Oculomotor capture by rewarding stimuli Vision Research 2012 74 80 85 10.1016/j.visres.2012.07.024 22902641 · DOI · Paper page
  51. Theeuwes J Godijn R Irrelevant singletons capture attention: Evidence from inhibition of return Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 2002 64 5 764 770 10.3758/BF03194743 12201335 · DOI
  52. Theeuwes, J., De Vries, G. J., & Godijn, R. (2003). Attentional and oculomotor capture with static singletons. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 65(5), 735–746. 12956581
  53. Theeuwes J Kramer AF Hahn S Irwin DE Zelinsky GJ Influence of attentional capture on oculomotor control Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1999 25 6 1595 10641312
  54. Treisman A Kahneman D Burkell J Perceptual objects and the cost of filtering Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 1983 33 6 527 532 10.3758/BF03202934 6622188 · DOI
  55. Tsal Y Makovski T The attentional white bear phenomenon: The mandatory allocation of attention to expected distractor locations Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2006 32 2 351 16634675
  56. Turk-Browne NB Jungé JA Scholl BJ The automaticity of visual statistical learning Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2005 134 4 552 10.1037/0096-3445.134.4.552 16316291 · DOI
  57. Yantis S Egeth HE On the distinction between visual salience and stimulus-driven attentional capture Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1999 25 3 661 10385983
  58. Yantis, S., Anderson, B. A., Wampler, E. K., & Laurent, P. A. (2012). Reward and attentional control in visual search. In The Influence of Attention, Learning, and Motivation on Visual Search (pp. 91–116). Springer New York. PMC4323078 23437631
  59. Zhaoping L Attention capture by eye of origin singletons even without awareness—A hallmark of a bottom-up saliency map in the primary visual cortex Journal of Vision 2008 8 5 1 10.1167/8.5.1 18842072 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Failing, M., & Theeuwes, J.
Affiliations
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
Corresponding author
Failing, Michel
ORCID
Venue
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2017-07-21
Volume
79
Issue
8
Pages
2275-2298
ISSN
  • 1943-3921 (ISSN-L)
  • 1943-393X
DOI
10.3758/s13414-017-1376-8
PMC
PMC5662709
OpenAlex
W2737641570
Cited by
58
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1
FWCI
3.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Attention Perception & Psychophysics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
H2020 European Research Council (ERC-2012-AdG-323413)
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
selective attention, reward signaling, reward magnitude, attentional capture, reward contingency, top-down attention, bottom-up attention, task-irrelevant stimuli, attentional prioritization, operant conditioning
MeSH terms
Attention, Female, Humans, Learning, Male, Reaction Time, Reward, Young Adult

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