History effects in visual search for monsters: Search times, choice biases, and liking

Repeating targets and distractors on consecutive visual search trials facilitates search performance, whereas switching targets and distractors harms search. In addition, search repetition leads to biases in free choice tasks, in that previously attended targets are more likely to be chosen than distractors. Another line of research has shown that attended items receive high liking ratings, whereas ignored distractors are rated negatively. Potential relations between the three effects are unclear, however. Here we simultaneously measured repetition benefits and switching costs for search times, choice biases, and liking ratings in color singleton visual search for “monster” shapes. We showed that if expectations from search repetition are violated, targets are liked to be less attended than otherwise. Choice biases were, on the other hand, affected by distractor repetition, but not by target/distractor switches. Target repetition speeded search times but had little influence on choice or liking. Our findings suggest that choice biases reflect distractor inhibition, and liking reflects the conflict associated with attending to previously inhibited stimuli, while speeded search follows both target and distractor repetition. Our results support the newly proposed affective-feedback-of-hypothesis-testing account of cognition, and additionally, shed new light on the priming of visual search.

[1]  Stefan Pollmann,et al.  Striatal activations signal prediction errors on confidence in the absence of external feedback , 2012, NeuroImage.

[2]  Jonathan W. Peirce,et al.  PsychoPy—Psychophysics software in Python , 2007, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[3]  Ómar I. Jóhannesson,et al.  Blaming the victims of your own mistakes: How visual search accuracy influences evaluation of stimuli , 2015, Cognition & emotion.

[4]  H. Müller,et al.  Cross-trial priming in visual search for singleton conjunction targets: Role of repeated target and distractor features , 2006, Perception & psychophysics.

[5]  Claus-Christian Carbon,et al.  The aesthetic aha: on the pleasure of having insights into Gestalt. , 2013, Acta psychologica.

[6]  Dominique Lamy,et al.  Priming of Pop-out provides reliable measures of target activation and distractor inhibition in selective attention , 2008, Vision Research.

[7]  P. Gollwitzer,et al.  Distractor devaluation in a flanker task: object-specific effects without distractor recognition memory. , 2014, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[8]  Árni Kristjánsson,et al.  Object- and feature-based priming in visual search , 2010 .

[9]  D. Berlyne Novelty, complexity, and hedonic value , 1970 .

[10]  John G. Taylor,et al.  Efficient Attentional Selection Predicts Distractor Devaluation: Event-related Potential Evidence for a Direct Link between Attention and Emotion , 2007, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[11]  W. Schultz Behavioral theories and the neurophysiology of reward. , 2006, Annual review of psychology.

[12]  A. Chetverikov,et al.  How to tell a wife from a hat: affective feedback in perceptual categorization. , 2014, Acta psychologica.

[13]  R. Bornstein Exposure and affect: Overview and meta-analysis of research, 1968–1987. , 1989 .

[14]  Brian A. Goolsby,et al.  Feature-based inhibition underlies the affective consequences of attention , 2009 .

[15]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Priming of pop-out: I. Role of features , 1994, Memory & cognition.

[16]  R. Zajonc Feeling and thinking : Preferences need no inferences , 1980 .

[17]  J. Brascamp,et al.  Priming of pop-out on multiple time scales during visual search , 2011, Vision Research.

[18]  Jane E. Raymond,et al.  Affective Influences of Selective Attention , 2006 .

[19]  R. Simons,et al.  Error-related psychophysiology and negative affect , 2004, Brain and Cognition.

[20]  G. Hajcak,et al.  The error-related negativity relates to sadness following mood induction among individuals with high neuroticism. , 2012, Social cognitive and affective neuroscience.

[21]  J. Enns,et al.  What's next? New evidence for prediction in human vision , 2008, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[22]  A. Chetverikov Warmth of familiarity and chill of error: Affective consequences of recognition decisions , 2014, Cognition & emotion.

[23]  Russell H. Fazio,et al.  A practical guide to the use of response latency in social psychological research. , 1990 .

[24]  W. Notebaert,et al.  Conflict: Run! Reduced Stroop interference with avoidance responses , 2012, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[25]  D. Tucker,et al.  Mood, personality, and self-monitoring: negative affect and emotionality in relation to frontal lobe mechanisms of error monitoring. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[26]  J. Hohwy Attention and Conscious Perception in the Hypothesis Testing Brain , 2012, Front. Psychology.

[27]  Klaus Kessler,et al.  Attentional Inhibition Has Social-Emotional Consequences for Unfamiliar Faces , 2005, Psychological science.

[28]  Dominique Lamy,et al.  A dual-stage account of inter-trial priming effects , 2010, Vision Research.

[29]  Stefan Pollmann,et al.  A universal role of the ventral striatum in reward-based learning: Evidence from human studies , 2014, Neurobiology of Learning and Memory.

[30]  G. Dreisbach,et al.  Conflicts as aversive signals , 2012, Brain and Cognition.

[31]  M. Clark,et al.  Research Methods in Personality and Social Psychology , 1990 .

[32]  Jon Driver,et al.  Repetition streaks increase perceptual sensitivity in visual search of brief displays , 2008, Visual cognition.

[33]  J. Driver,et al.  Priming in visual search: Context effects, target repetition effects, and role-reversal effects , 2005 .

[34]  Á. Kristjánsson,et al.  Object- and feature-based priming in visual search , 2008, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[35]  Satoru Suzuki,et al.  Understanding priming of color-singleton search: Roles of attention at encoding and “retrieval” , 2001, Perception & psychophysics.

[36]  Tamara C. Cristescu,et al.  Modelling distractor devaluation (DD) and its neurophysiological correlates , 2009, Neuropsychologia.

[37]  Árni Kristjánsson,et al.  Priming in visual search: Separating the effects of target repetition, distractor repetition and role-reversal , 2008, Vision Research.

[38]  Mark A. Elliott,et al.  Being right is its own reward: Load and performance related ventral striatum activation to correct responses during a working memory task in youth , 2012, NeuroImage.

[39]  G. Pourtois,et al.  Evidence for the automatic evaluation of self-generated actions , 2012, Cognition.

[40]  Karl J. Friston The free-energy principle: a unified brain theory? , 2010, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[41]  Claus Bundesen,et al.  Independent priming of location and color in identification of briefly presented letters , 2014, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[42]  Paolo Martini,et al.  System identification in Priming of Pop-Out , 2010, Vision Research.

[43]  Moshe Bar,et al.  Predictions: a universal principle in the operation of the human brain , 2009, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[44]  Á. Kristjánsson,et al.  Is goal-directed attentional guidance just intertrial priming? A review. , 2013, Journal of vision.

[45]  C. Summerfield,et al.  Expectation (and attention) in visual cognition , 2009, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[46]  Arni Kristjánsson,et al.  The boundary conditions of priming of visual search: From passive viewing through task-relevant working memory load , 2013, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[47]  Jane E Raymond,et al.  Selective Attention Determines Emotional Responses to Novel Visual Stimuli , 2003, Psychological science.

[48]  Árni Kristjánsson,et al.  Episodic retrieval and feature facilitation in intertrial priming of visual search , 2011, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[49]  Thomas Goschke,et al.  Modulation of the error-related negativity by induction of short-term negative affect , 2009, Neuropsychologia.

[50]  G. Campana,et al.  Where perception meets memory: A review of repetition priming in visual search tasks , 2010, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[51]  G. Dreisbach,et al.  Conflicts as aversive signals: Conflict priming increases negative judgments for neutral stimuli , 2013, Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience.

[52]  G. Pourtois,et al.  Erroneous and correct actions have a different affective valence: evidence from ERPs. , 2013, Emotion.

[53]  Christian N. L. Olivers,et al.  Intertrial priming stemming from ambiguity: A new account of priming in visual search , 2006 .

[54]  Randolph Blake,et al.  Deciding where to attend: priming of pop-out drives target selection. , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[55]  Peter E. Clayson,et al.  What are the influences of orthogonally-manipulated valence and arousal on performance monitoring processes? The effects of affective state. , 2013, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.