Fortune and reversals of fortune in visual search: Reward contingencies for pop-out targets affect search efficiency and target repetition effects

Rewards have long been known to modulate overt behavior. But their possible impact on attentional and perceptual processes is less well documented. Here, we study whether the (changeable) reward level associated with two different pop-out targets might affect visual search and trial-to-trial target repetition effects (see Maljkovic & Nakayama, 1994). Observers searched for a target diamond shape with a singleton color among distractor diamond shapes of another color (e.g., green among red or vice versa) and then judged whether the target had a notch at its top or bottom. Correct judgments led to reward, with symbolic feedback indicating this immediately; actual rewards accumulated for receipt at study end. One particular target color led to a higher (10:1) reward for 75% of its correct judgments, whereas the other singleton target color (counterbalanced over participants) yielded the higher reward on only 25% of the trials. We measured search performance in terms of inverse efficiency (response time/proportion correct). The reward schedules not only led to better performance overall for the more rewarding target color, but also increased trial-to-trial priming for successively repeated targets in that color. The actual level of reward received on the preceding trial affected this, as did (orthogonally) the likely level. When reward schedules were reversed within blocks, without explicit instruction, corresponding reversal of the impact on search performance emerged within around 6 trials, asymptoting at around 15 trials, apparently without the observers’ explicit knowledge of the contingency. These results establish that pop-out search and target repetition effects can be influenced by target reward levels, with search performance and repetition effects dynamically tracking changes in reward contingency.

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

[2]  Árni Kristjánsson,et al.  Priming of Color and Position during Visual Search in Unilateral Spatial Neglect , 2005, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[3]  Jon Driver,et al.  Reward Priority of Visual Target Singletons Modulates Event-Related Potential Signatures of Attentional Selection , 2009, Psychological science.

[4]  Michael L. Platt,et al.  Neural correlates of decision variables in parietal cortex , 1999, Nature.

[5]  A. Treisman,et al.  A feature-integration theory of attention , 1980, Cognitive Psychology.

[6]  AÂ rni KristjaÂnsson Rapid learning in attention shifts : A review , 2005 .

[7]  Pia Rotshtein,et al.  On-line attentional selection from competing stimuli in opposite visual fields: effects on human visual cortex and control processes. , 2006, Journal of neurophysiology.

[8]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Priming of popout: III. A short-term implicit memory system beneficial for rapid target selection , 2000 .

[9]  Stefanie I. Becker,et al.  The stage of priming: Are intertrial repetition effects attentional or decisional? , 2008, Vision Research.

[10]  L. Chelazzi,et al.  Visual Selective Attention and the Effects of Monetary Rewards , 2006, Psychological science.

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

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

[13]  Arni Kristjansson,et al.  Efficient visual search without top-down or bottom-up guidance , 2005, Perception & psychophysics.

[14]  P. Glimcher,et al.  JOURNAL OF THE EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS OF BEHAVIOR 2005, 84, 555–579 NUMBER 3(NOVEMBER) DYNAMIC RESPONSE-BY-RESPONSE MODELS OF MATCHING BEHAVIOR IN RHESUS MONKEYS , 2022 .

[15]  K Nakayama,et al.  Rapid, Object-Based Learning in the Deployment of Transient Attention , 2001, Perception.

[16]  E. Macaluso,et al.  Neural basis for priming of pop-out during visual search revealed with fMRI. , 2007, Cerebral cortex.

[17]  Susan L. Franzel,et al.  Guided search: an alternative to the feature integration model for visual search. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[18]  M. Bravo,et al.  The role of attention in different visual-search tasks , 1992, Perception & psychophysics.

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

[20]  W. Newsome,et al.  Choosing the greater of two goods: neural currencies for valuation and decision making , 2005, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[21]  Gianluca Campana,et al.  Visual area V5/MT remembers "what" but not "where". , 2004, Cerebral cortex.

[22]  Á. Kristjánsson "I know what you did on the last trial"--a selective review of research on priming in visual search. , 2008, Frontiers in bioscience : a journal and virtual library.

[23]  W. Newsome,et al.  Matching Behavior and the Representation of Value in the Parietal Cortex , 2004, Science.

[24]  P. Glimcher,et al.  Activity in Posterior Parietal Cortex Is Correlated with the Relative Subjective Desirability of Action , 2004, Neuron.

[25]  U. Neisser VISUAL SEARCH. , 1964, Scientific American.

[26]  H J Müller,et al.  Visual search for singleton feature targets within and across feature dimensions , 1995, Perception & psychophysics.

[27]  J Theeuwes,et al.  Reward primes visual search , 2008 .

[28]  J. Hoffmann,et al.  The European Society for Cognitive Psychology , 1999 .

[29]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  The limits of top-down control of visual attention. , 2009, Acta psychologica.

[30]  B. Julesz A brief outline of the texton theory of human vision , 1984, Trends in Neurosciences.

[31]  Jillian H. Fecteau,et al.  Priming of pop-out depends upon the current goals of observers. , 2007, Journal of vision.

[32]  James T. Townsend,et al.  The Stochastic Modeling of Elementary Psychological Processes , 1983 .

[33]  H. Müller,et al.  Visual search and selective attention , 2006 .

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

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

[36]  Gianluca Campana,et al.  Priming of motion direction and area V5/MT: a test of perceptual memory. , 2002, Cerebral cortex.

[37]  C. Olivers,et al.  On the dissociation between compound and present/absent tasks in visual search: Intertrial priming is ambiguity driven , 2006 .

[38]  Á. Kristjánsson,et al.  Learning in shifts of transient attention improves recognition of parts of ambiguous figure-ground displays. , 2009, Journal of vision.

[39]  Ken Nakayama,et al.  A primitive memory system for the deployment of transient attention , 2003, Perception & psychophysics.

[40]  P Cavanagh,et al.  Familiarity and pop-out in visual search , 1994, Perception & psychophysics.

[41]  J. Wolfe,et al.  What attributes guide the deployment of visual attention and how do they do it? , 2004, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[42]  R. Ivry,et al.  Dissociation of short- and long-range apparent motion in visual search. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

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

[45]  P. Glimcher,et al.  Visual processing, learning and feedback in the primate eye movement system , 2009, Trends in Neurosciences.