Mixed signals: The effect of conflicting reward- and goal-driven biases on selective attention

Preciado, Daniel; Munneke, Jaap; Theeuwes, Jan · 2017 · Crossref

DOI: 10.3758/s13414-017-1322-9

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This study investigates the interaction between reward-driven (value-based) and goal-driven (endogenous) biases in selective attention, specifically examining how these factors compete when associated with the same stimulus. While previous research has established that reward-associated stimuli can capture attention similarly to physically salient cues, less is known about how this value-driven bias interacts with voluntary, goal-directed control. The authors aimed to determine whether reward-driven biases are integrated into the same attentional priority map as exogenous and endogenous factors, and whether goal-driven control can overcome the automatic capture of attention by reward signals. The researchers conducted two experiments using a modified Posner spatial cueing paradigm with 31 participants in Experiment 1 and 42 in Experiment 2. Participants viewed two colored cues followed by sinusoidal gratings and reported the orientation of the target grating. In Experiment 1, one cue signaled the availability of a monetary reward but provided no spatial information about the target location, creating a scenario where reward-driven attention had no conflicting goal. In Experiment 2, the same reward-signaling cue also indicated that the target was most likely to appear at the opposite location, creating a direct conflict between the reward-driven bias (pulling attention to the cue) and the goal-driven bias (directing attention away). Both experiments utilized short (100 ms) and long (1,000 ms) interstimulus intervals (ISIs) to probe the time course of these attentional effects. Performance was measured via perceptual sensitivity (d’) and response times (RT). Experiment 1 demonstrated that the reward-signaling cue captured attention automatically, resulting in performance benefits (higher d’ and faster RTs) when the target appeared at the cue’s location and costs when it appeared at the opposite location. These effects persisted at both short and long ISIs, indicating that attention lingered at the reward-associated location despite the lack of predictive value for the target. Experiment 2 revealed that when reward and goal biases conflicted, the outcome depended on the time available for processing. At the short ISI, only performance costs were observed, suggesting that the rapid, automatic reward-driven capture dominated. However, at the long ISI, performance benefits emerged when the target appeared at the location opposite the cue (goal-congruent), indicating that goal-driven control successfully overcame the reward-driven bias given sufficient time. The findings suggest that reward-driven biases are integrated into the attentional priority map alongside exogenous and endogenous factors. The results highlight a temporal dynamic in attentional control: reward-driven effects operate rapidly and automatically, similar to stimulus-driven capture, but can be overridden by voluntary, goal-driven control if sufficient processing time is available. This implies that while value associations strongly influence early stages of attentional selection, they do not permanently dictate attentional allocation, allowing for flexible control based on current task goals.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-25; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• attention selective divided