{"title":"The assessment of attentional bias to cleanliness stimuli in different versions of the dot-probe task: Evidence for a motivational account.","authors":"Merve Boğa, Dirk Wentura","doi":"10.1177/17470218241281694","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Vogt et al. (2011) investigated the role of goal-relevance in attention. Specifically, they induced the emotional state of disgust and showed an attentional bias (AB) to goal-related stimuli (i.e., cleanliness pictures) using the dot-probe task. In two experiments, we tested (a) an alternative interpretation and (b) the role of an important methodological feature of the dot-probe task. As the effect can be interpreted alternatively as affective counter-regulation (i.e., cleanliness-related pictures attracted attention because they are positive in the negative disgust state), we added positive stimuli to test whether the AB in the disgust state extends to these stimuli. In Experiment 1, we used the location dot-probe task. That is, participants had to categorise the location of the target. It can be argued that this task confounds attentional processes with response priming processes. In Experiment 2, we used a discrimination dot-probe task, that is, participants had to categorise a target feature that varied orthogonally to location, thus eliminating the confound. In Experiment 1, we did not replicate the effect of emotional state on AB for cleanliness stimuli, whereas in Experiment 2, we did. Mean AB scores for positive stimuli were not affected by emotional state. Two conclusions were drawn: First, the result of Experiment 2 supports the motivational account of Vogt and colleagues. Second, the results support the use of the discrimination task for both theoretical reasons (i.e., effects can be more clearly interpreted as based on attentional processes) and empirical reasons (i.e., the location task did not replicate the expected pattern).</p>","PeriodicalId":20869,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"17470218241281694"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218241281694","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Vogt et al. (2011) investigated the role of goal-relevance in attention. Specifically, they induced the emotional state of disgust and showed an attentional bias (AB) to goal-related stimuli (i.e., cleanliness pictures) using the dot-probe task. In two experiments, we tested (a) an alternative interpretation and (b) the role of an important methodological feature of the dot-probe task. As the effect can be interpreted alternatively as affective counter-regulation (i.e., cleanliness-related pictures attracted attention because they are positive in the negative disgust state), we added positive stimuli to test whether the AB in the disgust state extends to these stimuli. In Experiment 1, we used the location dot-probe task. That is, participants had to categorise the location of the target. It can be argued that this task confounds attentional processes with response priming processes. In Experiment 2, we used a discrimination dot-probe task, that is, participants had to categorise a target feature that varied orthogonally to location, thus eliminating the confound. In Experiment 1, we did not replicate the effect of emotional state on AB for cleanliness stimuli, whereas in Experiment 2, we did. Mean AB scores for positive stimuli were not affected by emotional state. Two conclusions were drawn: First, the result of Experiment 2 supports the motivational account of Vogt and colleagues. Second, the results support the use of the discrimination task for both theoretical reasons (i.e., effects can be more clearly interpreted as based on attentional processes) and empirical reasons (i.e., the location task did not replicate the expected pattern).
期刊介绍:
Promoting the interests of scientific psychology and its researchers, QJEP, the journal of the Experimental Psychology Society, is a leading journal with a long-standing tradition of publishing cutting-edge research. Several articles have become classic papers in the fields of attention, perception, learning, memory, language, and reasoning. The journal publishes original articles on any topic within the field of experimental psychology (including comparative research). These include substantial experimental reports, review papers, rapid communications (reporting novel techniques or ground breaking results), comments (on articles previously published in QJEP or on issues of general interest to experimental psychologists), and book reviews. Experimental results are welcomed from all relevant techniques, including behavioural testing, brain imaging and computational modelling.
QJEP offers a competitive publication time-scale. Accepted Rapid Communications have priority in the publication cycle and usually appear in print within three months. We aim to publish all accepted (but uncorrected) articles online within seven days. Our Latest Articles page offers immediate publication of articles upon reaching their final form.
The journal offers an open access option called Open Select, enabling authors to meet funder requirements to make their article free to read online for all in perpetuity. Authors also benefit from a broad and diverse subscription base that delivers the journal contents to a world-wide readership. Together these features ensure that the journal offers authors the opportunity to raise the visibility of their work to a global audience.