Rewarding outcomes enhance attentional capture and delay attentional disengagement

The effect of chronic academic stress on attentional bias towards value-associated stimuli

Individuals typically exhibit attentional bias towards stimuli that are considered valuable. This study aimed to investigate the effect of chronic academic stress on attentional bias towards value-associated stimuli. Both the stress group (preparation for a critical academic examination) and the control group performed a modified dot-probe task. Two-colour stimuli were presented simultaneously, one of which was associated with high or low monetary rewards through the value-associated training. The participants were then instructed to respond to the location of a probe dot which was presented either congruent or incongruent towards the value-associated stimuli. In the neutral condition, both stimuli were not value-associated ones. The results showed that (1) in the value-associated training task, shorter reaction times (RTs) and higher accuracies were observed for the high-value trials compared with the low-value trials in both groups, suggesting a successful association between neutral stimuli and value; (2) in the dot-probe task, the RTs were shorter for the high-/low-value congruent conditions compared with the high-/low-value incongruent conditions in both groups, suggesting an attentional bias towards value-associated stimuli; (3) compared to the control group, the stress group showed an increased disengagement (RTincongruent - RTneutral) effect but a similar orienting (RTneutral - RTcongruent) effect. These results suggested that chronic academic stress may promote attentional bias towards value-associated stimuli by impairing attentional disengagement.

Working memory components modulation of attentional disengagement from evaluative distractor

It is important for people to disengage attention from a distraction, which can help them complete the task at hand as quickly as possible. Recent studies have shown that people's attention stays longer on reward-distractors than on loss-distractors, and a delay in attentional disengagement is noted when reward-distractors are present. However, few studies have examined whether attentional disengagement from an evaluative distractor relies upon working memory (WM) components. In the present study, we used an attentional disengagement paradigm in which reward- or loss-distractors were presented at a central location and the target was presented at a peripheral location, in combination with different WM tasks. The results from Experiment 1 showed that participants were slower to disengage their attention from a central reward-distractor than a loss-distractor regardless of cognitive load when the phonological loop component of WM was involved. The results from Experiment 2 revealed that people had difficulty in shifting their attention away from a reward-distractor in comparison to a loss-distractor when spatial WM was low, whereas no such difference was observed when spatial WM was high. We conclude that WM components differently modulate attentional disengagement from evaluative distractors. That is, the processing of evaluative (reward and loss) distractors may rely on the same cognitive resources as the spatial WM component, but not the phonological loop component.