Literature DB >> 33145714

Learned value and predictiveness affect gaze but not figure assignment.

Sandersan Onie1,2, Mary A Peterson3, Mike Le Pelley4, Steven B Most4.   

Abstract

Many factors affect figure-ground segregation, but the contributions of attention and reward history to this process is uncertain. We conducted two experiments to investigate whether reward learning influences figure assignment and whether this relationship was mediated by attention. Participants learned to associate certain shapes with a reward contingency: During a learning phase, they chose between two shapes on each trial, with subsets of shapes associated with high-probability win, low-probability win, high-probability loss, and low-probability loss. In a test phase, participants were given a figure-ground task, in which they indicated which of two regions that shared a contour they perceived as the figure (high-probability win and low-probability win shapes were pitted against each other, as were high-probability loss and low-probability loss shapes). The results revealed that participants had learned the reward contingencies and that, following learning, attention was reliably drawn to the optimal stimulus. Despite this, neither reward history nor the resulting attentional allocation influenced figure-ground organization.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Attention; Eye gaze; Figure-ground perception; Learned value; Predictiveness; Visual perception

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33145714     DOI: 10.3758/s13414-020-02125-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys        ISSN: 1943-3921            Impact factor:   2.199


  24 in total

1.  The effect of predictive history on the learning of sub-sequence contingencies.

Authors:  T Beesley; M E Le Pelley
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2009-06-18       Impact factor: 2.143

2.  Cue competition affects temporal dynamics of edge-assignment in human visual cortex.

Authors:  Joseph L Brooks; Stephen E Palmer
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2010-02-10       Impact factor: 3.225

3.  Saccade target selection and object recognition: evidence for a common attentional mechanism.

Authors:  H Deubel; W X Schneider
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 1.886

4.  The Psychophysics Toolbox.

Authors:  D H Brainard
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  1997

Review 5.  Rewards teach visual selective attention.

Authors:  Leonardo Chelazzi; Andrea Perlato; Elisa Santandrea; Chiara Della Libera
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2012-12-19       Impact factor: 1.886

6.  Disentangling neural representations of value and salience in the human brain.

Authors:  Thorsten Kahnt; Soyoung Q Park; John-Dylan Haynes; Philippe N Tobler
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-03-17       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  The role of attention in the programming of saccades.

Authors:  E Kowler; E Anderson; B Dosher; E Blaser
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 1.886

8.  Overt attention and predictiveness in human contingency learning.

Authors:  M E Le Pelley; Tom Beesley; Oren Griffiths
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process       Date:  2011-04

9.  Binocular rivalry between emotional and neutral stimuli: a validation using fear conditioning and EEG.

Authors:  Georg W Alpers; Mirjana Ruhleder; Nora Walz; Andreas Mühlberger; Paul Pauli
Journal:  Int J Psychophysiol       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 2.997

10.  Learned value magnifies salience-based attentional capture.

Authors:  Brian A Anderson; Patryk A Laurent; Steven Yantis
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-11-21       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.