Value-driven attentional priority is context specific

Abstract

Attention is automatically drawn to stimulus features previously associated with reward, a phenomenon referred to as value-driven attentional capture. To date, value-driven attentional capture has been studied exclusively by manipulating stimulus-reward contingencies in an experimental setting. Although practical and intuitively appealing, this approach poses theoretical challenges to understanding the broader impact of reward on attention in everyday life. These challenges arise from the fact that associative learning between a given visual feature and reward is not limited to the context of an experiment, yet such extra-experimental learning is completely ignored in studies of value-driven attention. How is it, then, that experimentally established reward associations even influence attention, seemingly overshadowing any prior learning about particular features and rewards? And how do the effects of this experimental learning persist over long periods of time, in spite of all the intervening experiences outside of the lab that might interfere with the learning? One potential answer to these questions is that value-driven attention is context specific, such that different contexts evoke different value priors that the attention system uses to assign priority. In the present study, I directly tested this hypothesis. The results show that the same stimulus feature either does or does not capture attention, depending on whether it has been rewarded specifically in the context within which it appears. The findings provide insight into how multiple reward structures can efficiently guide attention with minimal interference.

Figure 1

Sequence and time course of trial events. (A) Targets were defined as the red or green circle, and participants reported the identity of the line segment inside of the target (vertical or horizontal) with a key press. The background scene (forest or city street) predicted whether a particular target color would be rewarded for a correct response. (B) During the test phase, the target was defined as the unique shape. On half of the trials, one of the non-target items—the distractor—was rendered in the color of a formerly rewarded target, presented equally-often on each background scene. No reward feedback was provided.

Figure 2

Mean response time by distractor condition in the test phase. Error bars reflect the within-subjects S.E.M.