Cargando…

To look or not to look? Reward, selection history, and oculomotor guidance

The current eye-tracking study examined the influence of reward on oculomotor performance, and the extent to which learned stimulus-reward associations interacted with voluntary oculomotor control with a modified paradigm based on the classical antisaccade task. Participants were shown two equally s...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Preciado, Daniel, Theeuwes, Jan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Physiological Society 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6230805/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30020840
http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/jn.00275.2018
_version_ 1783370134532915200
author Preciado, Daniel
Theeuwes, Jan
author_facet Preciado, Daniel
Theeuwes, Jan
author_sort Preciado, Daniel
collection PubMed
description The current eye-tracking study examined the influence of reward on oculomotor performance, and the extent to which learned stimulus-reward associations interacted with voluntary oculomotor control with a modified paradigm based on the classical antisaccade task. Participants were shown two equally salient stimuli simultaneously: a gray and a colored circle, and they were instructed to make a fast saccade to one of them. During the first phase of the experiment, participants made a fast saccade toward the colored stimulus, and their performance determined a (cash) bonus. During the second, participants made a saccade toward the gray stimulus, with no rewards available. On each trial, one of three colors was presented, each associated with high, low or no reward during the first phase. Results from the first phase showed improved accuracy and shorter saccade latencies on high-reward trials, while those from the second replicated well-known effects typical of the antisaccade task, namely, decreased accuracy and increased latency during phase II, even despite the absence of abrupt asymmetric onsets. Crucially, performance differences between phases revealed longer latencies and less accurate saccades during the second phase for high-reward trials, compared with the low- and no-reward trials. Further analyses indicated that oculomotor capture by reward signals is mainly found for saccades with short latencies, while this automatic capture can be overridden through voluntary control with longer ones. These results highlight the natural flexibility and adaptability of the attentional system, and the role of reward in modulating this plasticity. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Typically, in the antisaccade task, participants need to suppress an automatic orienting reflex toward a suddenly appearing peripheral stimulus. Here, we introduce an alternative antisaccade task without such abrupt onsets. We replicate well-known antisaccade effects (more errors and longer latencies), demonstrating the role of reward in developing selective oculomotor biases. Results highlight how reward and selection history facilitate developing automatic biases from goal-driven behavior, and they suggest that this process responds to individual differences in impulsivity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6230805
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher American Physiological Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62308052019-04-11 To look or not to look? Reward, selection history, and oculomotor guidance Preciado, Daniel Theeuwes, Jan J Neurophysiol Research Article The current eye-tracking study examined the influence of reward on oculomotor performance, and the extent to which learned stimulus-reward associations interacted with voluntary oculomotor control with a modified paradigm based on the classical antisaccade task. Participants were shown two equally salient stimuli simultaneously: a gray and a colored circle, and they were instructed to make a fast saccade to one of them. During the first phase of the experiment, participants made a fast saccade toward the colored stimulus, and their performance determined a (cash) bonus. During the second, participants made a saccade toward the gray stimulus, with no rewards available. On each trial, one of three colors was presented, each associated with high, low or no reward during the first phase. Results from the first phase showed improved accuracy and shorter saccade latencies on high-reward trials, while those from the second replicated well-known effects typical of the antisaccade task, namely, decreased accuracy and increased latency during phase II, even despite the absence of abrupt asymmetric onsets. Crucially, performance differences between phases revealed longer latencies and less accurate saccades during the second phase for high-reward trials, compared with the low- and no-reward trials. Further analyses indicated that oculomotor capture by reward signals is mainly found for saccades with short latencies, while this automatic capture can be overridden through voluntary control with longer ones. These results highlight the natural flexibility and adaptability of the attentional system, and the role of reward in modulating this plasticity. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Typically, in the antisaccade task, participants need to suppress an automatic orienting reflex toward a suddenly appearing peripheral stimulus. Here, we introduce an alternative antisaccade task without such abrupt onsets. We replicate well-known antisaccade effects (more errors and longer latencies), demonstrating the role of reward in developing selective oculomotor biases. Results highlight how reward and selection history facilitate developing automatic biases from goal-driven behavior, and they suggest that this process responds to individual differences in impulsivity. American Physiological Society 2018-10-01 2018-07-18 /pmc/articles/PMC6230805/ /pubmed/30020840 http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/jn.00275.2018 Text en Copyright © 2018 the American Physiological Society http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en_US Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution CC-BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en_US) : © the American Physiological Society.
spellingShingle Research Article
Preciado, Daniel
Theeuwes, Jan
To look or not to look? Reward, selection history, and oculomotor guidance
title To look or not to look? Reward, selection history, and oculomotor guidance
title_full To look or not to look? Reward, selection history, and oculomotor guidance
title_fullStr To look or not to look? Reward, selection history, and oculomotor guidance
title_full_unstemmed To look or not to look? Reward, selection history, and oculomotor guidance
title_short To look or not to look? Reward, selection history, and oculomotor guidance
title_sort to look or not to look? reward, selection history, and oculomotor guidance
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6230805/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30020840
http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/jn.00275.2018
work_keys_str_mv AT preciadodaniel tolookornottolookrewardselectionhistoryandoculomotorguidance
AT theeuwesjan tolookornottolookrewardselectionhistoryandoculomotorguidance