多模态干扰物对标志跟踪者和目标跟踪者注意力的影响。

IF 2.3 3区 心理学 Q2 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Noémie Thériault, Mathieu J. Bourque, Frédéric Huppé-Gourgues
{"title":"多模态干扰物对标志跟踪者和目标跟踪者注意力的影响。","authors":"Noémie Thériault,&nbsp;Mathieu J. Bourque,&nbsp;Frédéric Huppé-Gourgues","doi":"10.1016/j.bbr.2025.115800","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>During Pavlovian conditioning, Sign-Tracker (ST), Goal-Tracker (GT), and Intermediate (IN) phenotypes emerge, as characterized by the degree to which an individual attributes incentive salience to reward-associated cues. These operationally defined phenotypes differ in other respects: In human studies, STs tend to favor bottom-up attention, while GTs tend to favor top-down attention. There is some limited evidence that rats exhibit similar patterns during Pavlovian conditioning. To substantiate this model, we tested the hypothesis that introducing light and auditory distractors would disproportionately impair the signal detection performance of ST rats, given their propensity for bottom-up attention processing, as opposed to GT rats, who rely more on top-down strategies. To this end, we assessed detection performance in 86 Long-Evans rats by introducing both visual and auditory distractors of varying intensities. This approach aimed to investigate the limits of attentional control among ST, GT, and IN rats across six variants of a sustained attention task. Although distractors impaired performance, contrary to initial expectations, the extent of this impairment varied across phenotypes and tasks, indicating a more nuanced relationship between attentional mechanisms and susceptibility to distractions than previously posited. The present results suggest the occurrence of a complex interplay of attentional mechanisms that may not align completely with the ST/GT dichotomy as traditionally presented. These findings have potential implications for understanding individual differences in attentional control and susceptibility to distractions, which could relate to addiction vulnerability.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":8823,"journal":{"name":"Behavioural Brain Research","volume":"495 ","pages":"Article 115800"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The effects of multimodal distractors on sign-trackers and goal-trackers attention\",\"authors\":\"Noémie Thériault,&nbsp;Mathieu J. Bourque,&nbsp;Frédéric Huppé-Gourgues\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.bbr.2025.115800\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>During Pavlovian conditioning, Sign-Tracker (ST), Goal-Tracker (GT), and Intermediate (IN) phenotypes emerge, as characterized by the degree to which an individual attributes incentive salience to reward-associated cues. These operationally defined phenotypes differ in other respects: In human studies, STs tend to favor bottom-up attention, while GTs tend to favor top-down attention. There is some limited evidence that rats exhibit similar patterns during Pavlovian conditioning. To substantiate this model, we tested the hypothesis that introducing light and auditory distractors would disproportionately impair the signal detection performance of ST rats, given their propensity for bottom-up attention processing, as opposed to GT rats, who rely more on top-down strategies. To this end, we assessed detection performance in 86 Long-Evans rats by introducing both visual and auditory distractors of varying intensities. This approach aimed to investigate the limits of attentional control among ST, GT, and IN rats across six variants of a sustained attention task. Although distractors impaired performance, contrary to initial expectations, the extent of this impairment varied across phenotypes and tasks, indicating a more nuanced relationship between attentional mechanisms and susceptibility to distractions than previously posited. The present results suggest the occurrence of a complex interplay of attentional mechanisms that may not align completely with the ST/GT dichotomy as traditionally presented. These findings have potential implications for understanding individual differences in attentional control and susceptibility to distractions, which could relate to addiction vulnerability.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8823,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Behavioural Brain Research\",\"volume\":\"495 \",\"pages\":\"Article 115800\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Behavioural Brain Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166432825003870\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioural Brain Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166432825003870","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在巴甫洛夫条件反射过程中,出现了标志追踪型(ST)、目标追踪型(GT)和中间型(IN)表型,其特征在于个体将奖励相关线索的激励显著性属性的程度。这些操作上定义的表型在其他方面有所不同:在人类研究中,STs倾向于自下而上的注意,而gt倾向于自上而下的注意。有一些有限的证据表明,老鼠在巴甫洛夫条件反射中表现出类似的模式。为了证实这一模型,我们测试了一个假设,即考虑到ST大鼠倾向于自下而上的注意力处理,而GT大鼠则更多地依赖于自上而下的策略,引入光和听觉干扰物会严重损害ST大鼠的信号检测性能。为此,我们通过引入不同强度的视觉和听觉干扰物来评估86只Long-Evans大鼠的检测性能。该方法旨在研究ST, GT和IN大鼠在持续注意任务的六种变体中的注意控制极限。尽管干扰物会损害表现,但与最初的预期相反,这种损害的程度因表型和任务而异,这表明注意机制和对干扰的易感性之间的关系比之前假设的更微妙。目前的结果表明,注意机制的复杂相互作用的发生可能不完全符合传统提出的ST/GT二分法。这些发现对于理解个体在注意力控制和对干扰的易感性方面的差异具有潜在的意义,这可能与成瘾脆弱性有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The effects of multimodal distractors on sign-trackers and goal-trackers attention
During Pavlovian conditioning, Sign-Tracker (ST), Goal-Tracker (GT), and Intermediate (IN) phenotypes emerge, as characterized by the degree to which an individual attributes incentive salience to reward-associated cues. These operationally defined phenotypes differ in other respects: In human studies, STs tend to favor bottom-up attention, while GTs tend to favor top-down attention. There is some limited evidence that rats exhibit similar patterns during Pavlovian conditioning. To substantiate this model, we tested the hypothesis that introducing light and auditory distractors would disproportionately impair the signal detection performance of ST rats, given their propensity for bottom-up attention processing, as opposed to GT rats, who rely more on top-down strategies. To this end, we assessed detection performance in 86 Long-Evans rats by introducing both visual and auditory distractors of varying intensities. This approach aimed to investigate the limits of attentional control among ST, GT, and IN rats across six variants of a sustained attention task. Although distractors impaired performance, contrary to initial expectations, the extent of this impairment varied across phenotypes and tasks, indicating a more nuanced relationship between attentional mechanisms and susceptibility to distractions than previously posited. The present results suggest the occurrence of a complex interplay of attentional mechanisms that may not align completely with the ST/GT dichotomy as traditionally presented. These findings have potential implications for understanding individual differences in attentional control and susceptibility to distractions, which could relate to addiction vulnerability.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Behavioural Brain Research
Behavioural Brain Research 医学-行为科学
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
383
审稿时长
61 days
期刊介绍: Behavioural Brain Research is an international, interdisciplinary journal dedicated to the publication of articles in the field of behavioural neuroscience, broadly defined. Contributions from the entire range of disciplines that comprise the neurosciences, behavioural sciences or cognitive sciences are appropriate, as long as the goal is to delineate the neural mechanisms underlying behaviour. Thus, studies may range from neurophysiological, neuroanatomical, neurochemical or neuropharmacological analysis of brain-behaviour relations, including the use of molecular genetic or behavioural genetic approaches, to studies that involve the use of brain imaging techniques, to neuroethological studies. Reports of original research, of major methodological advances, or of novel conceptual approaches are all encouraged. The journal will also consider critical reviews on selected topics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信