Loading…
Safety First: Instrumentality for Reaching Safety Determines Attention Allocation Under Threat
Theories of attention to emotional information suggest that attentional processes prioritize threatening information. In this article, we suggest that attention will prioritize the events that are most instrumental to a goal in any given context, which in threatening situations is typically reaching...
Saved in:
Published in: | Emotion (Washington, D.C.) D.C.), 2017-04, Vol.17 (3), p.528-537 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a387t-e8bf2b187f7f1903c09da1c227b111865d39d93631c8595cd330c38854846d363 |
---|---|
cites | |
container_end_page | 537 |
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 528 |
container_title | Emotion (Washington, D.C.) |
container_volume | 17 |
creator | Vogt, Julia Koster, Ernst H. W. De Houwer, Jan |
description | Theories of attention to emotional information suggest that attentional processes prioritize threatening information. In this article, we suggest that attention will prioritize the events that are most instrumental to a goal in any given context, which in threatening situations is typically reaching safety. To test our hypotheses, we used an attentional cueing paradigm that contained cues signaling imminent threat (i.e., aversive noises) as well as cues that allowed participants to avoid threat (instrumental safety signals). Correct reactions to instrumental safety signals seemingly allowed participants to lower the presentation rate of the threat. Experiment 1 demonstrates that attention prioritizes instrumental safety signals over threat signals. Experiment 2 replicates this finding and additionally compares instrumental safety signals to other action-relevant signals controlling for action relevance as cause of the effects. Experiment 3 demonstrates that when actions toward threat signals permit to avoid threat, attention prioritizes threat signals. Taken together, these results support the view that instrumentality for reaching safety determines the allocation of attention under threat. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1037/emo0000251 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1842549414</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1848264874</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a387t-e8bf2b187f7f1903c09da1c227b111865d39d93631c8595cd330c38854846d363</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpd0ctqGzEUBmBREurE7SYPUAayKQmT6ugyI3Vn0lwMhkBrbytkzZl6wlxcSbPw20eu3QSijQ6Hjx_xi5ALoDdAefkNu4GmwyR8IGegOeQgoThJs2Qq51KwCTkP4ZlSEFyLj2TCSlVoURRn5PcvW2PcZfeND_F7Nu9D9GOHfbRtk9b14LOfaN2m6f9kR_oDI_qu6TFksxgTbYY-m7Xt4Oy_cdVX6LPlxqONn8hpbduAn4_3lKzu75a3j_ni6WF-O1vklqsy5qjWNVuDKuuyBk25o7qy4Bgr1wCgCllxXWlecHBKaukqzqnjSkmhRFGl_ZR8PeRu_fB3xBBN1wSHbWt7HMZgQAkmhRapgCm5fEefh9H36XV7pVghVLlXVwfl_BCCx9psfdNZvzNAzb5189Z6wl-OkeO6w-qV_q85gesDsFtrtmHnrI-NazG40fvU4D7MQGm4ST_GXwDIBYtl</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1848264874</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Safety First: Instrumentality for Reaching Safety Determines Attention Allocation Under Threat</title><source>PsycARTICLES</source><creator>Vogt, Julia ; Koster, Ernst H. W. ; De Houwer, Jan</creator><contributor>Pietromonaco, Paula ; DeSteno, David</contributor><creatorcontrib>Vogt, Julia ; Koster, Ernst H. W. ; De Houwer, Jan ; Pietromonaco, Paula ; DeSteno, David</creatorcontrib><description>Theories of attention to emotional information suggest that attentional processes prioritize threatening information. In this article, we suggest that attention will prioritize the events that are most instrumental to a goal in any given context, which in threatening situations is typically reaching safety. To test our hypotheses, we used an attentional cueing paradigm that contained cues signaling imminent threat (i.e., aversive noises) as well as cues that allowed participants to avoid threat (instrumental safety signals). Correct reactions to instrumental safety signals seemingly allowed participants to lower the presentation rate of the threat. Experiment 1 demonstrates that attention prioritizes instrumental safety signals over threat signals. Experiment 2 replicates this finding and additionally compares instrumental safety signals to other action-relevant signals controlling for action relevance as cause of the effects. Experiment 3 demonstrates that when actions toward threat signals permit to avoid threat, attention prioritizes threat signals. Taken together, these results support the view that instrumentality for reaching safety determines the allocation of attention under threat.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1528-3542</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1931-1516</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1037/emo0000251</identifier><identifier>PMID: 27869466</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: American Psychological Association</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Attention ; Attention - physiology ; Cues ; Emotions ; Female ; Human ; Humans ; Male ; Motivation ; Motivation - physiology ; Reaction Time - physiology ; Safety ; Threat ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Emotion (Washington, D.C.), 2017-04, Vol.17 (3), p.528-537</ispartof><rights>2016 American Psychological Association</rights><rights>(c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved).</rights><rights>2016, American Psychological Association</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a387t-e8bf2b187f7f1903c09da1c227b111865d39d93631c8595cd330c38854846d363</citedby><orcidid>0000-0003-0488-5224 ; 0000-0002-3178-2805 ; 0000-0003-0792-476X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27869466$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Pietromonaco, Paula</contributor><contributor>DeSteno, David</contributor><creatorcontrib>Vogt, Julia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Koster, Ernst H. W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Houwer, Jan</creatorcontrib><title>Safety First: Instrumentality for Reaching Safety Determines Attention Allocation Under Threat</title><title>Emotion (Washington, D.C.)</title><addtitle>Emotion</addtitle><description>Theories of attention to emotional information suggest that attentional processes prioritize threatening information. In this article, we suggest that attention will prioritize the events that are most instrumental to a goal in any given context, which in threatening situations is typically reaching safety. To test our hypotheses, we used an attentional cueing paradigm that contained cues signaling imminent threat (i.e., aversive noises) as well as cues that allowed participants to avoid threat (instrumental safety signals). Correct reactions to instrumental safety signals seemingly allowed participants to lower the presentation rate of the threat. Experiment 1 demonstrates that attention prioritizes instrumental safety signals over threat signals. Experiment 2 replicates this finding and additionally compares instrumental safety signals to other action-relevant signals controlling for action relevance as cause of the effects. Experiment 3 demonstrates that when actions toward threat signals permit to avoid threat, attention prioritizes threat signals. Taken together, these results support the view that instrumentality for reaching safety determines the allocation of attention under threat.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Attention</subject><subject>Attention - physiology</subject><subject>Cues</subject><subject>Emotions</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Human</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Motivation</subject><subject>Motivation - physiology</subject><subject>Reaction Time - physiology</subject><subject>Safety</subject><subject>Threat</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>1528-3542</issn><issn>1931-1516</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpd0ctqGzEUBmBREurE7SYPUAayKQmT6ugyI3Vn0lwMhkBrbytkzZl6wlxcSbPw20eu3QSijQ6Hjx_xi5ALoDdAefkNu4GmwyR8IGegOeQgoThJs2Qq51KwCTkP4ZlSEFyLj2TCSlVoURRn5PcvW2PcZfeND_F7Nu9D9GOHfbRtk9b14LOfaN2m6f9kR_oDI_qu6TFksxgTbYY-m7Xt4Oy_cdVX6LPlxqONn8hpbduAn4_3lKzu75a3j_ni6WF-O1vklqsy5qjWNVuDKuuyBk25o7qy4Bgr1wCgCllxXWlecHBKaukqzqnjSkmhRFGl_ZR8PeRu_fB3xBBN1wSHbWt7HMZgQAkmhRapgCm5fEefh9H36XV7pVghVLlXVwfl_BCCx9psfdNZvzNAzb5189Z6wl-OkeO6w-qV_q85gesDsFtrtmHnrI-NazG40fvU4D7MQGm4ST_GXwDIBYtl</recordid><startdate>201704</startdate><enddate>201704</enddate><creator>Vogt, Julia</creator><creator>Koster, Ernst H. W.</creator><creator>De Houwer, Jan</creator><general>American Psychological Association</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7RZ</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0488-5224</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3178-2805</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0792-476X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201704</creationdate><title>Safety First: Instrumentality for Reaching Safety Determines Attention Allocation Under Threat</title><author>Vogt, Julia ; Koster, Ernst H. W. ; De Houwer, Jan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a387t-e8bf2b187f7f1903c09da1c227b111865d39d93631c8595cd330c38854846d363</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Attention</topic><topic>Attention - physiology</topic><topic>Cues</topic><topic>Emotions</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Human</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Motivation</topic><topic>Motivation - physiology</topic><topic>Reaction Time - physiology</topic><topic>Safety</topic><topic>Threat</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Vogt, Julia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Koster, Ernst H. W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Houwer, Jan</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>PsycArticles (via ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Emotion (Washington, D.C.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Vogt, Julia</au><au>Koster, Ernst H. W.</au><au>De Houwer, Jan</au><au>Pietromonaco, Paula</au><au>DeSteno, David</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Safety First: Instrumentality for Reaching Safety Determines Attention Allocation Under Threat</atitle><jtitle>Emotion (Washington, D.C.)</jtitle><addtitle>Emotion</addtitle><date>2017-04</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>17</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>528</spage><epage>537</epage><pages>528-537</pages><issn>1528-3542</issn><eissn>1931-1516</eissn><abstract>Theories of attention to emotional information suggest that attentional processes prioritize threatening information. In this article, we suggest that attention will prioritize the events that are most instrumental to a goal in any given context, which in threatening situations is typically reaching safety. To test our hypotheses, we used an attentional cueing paradigm that contained cues signaling imminent threat (i.e., aversive noises) as well as cues that allowed participants to avoid threat (instrumental safety signals). Correct reactions to instrumental safety signals seemingly allowed participants to lower the presentation rate of the threat. Experiment 1 demonstrates that attention prioritizes instrumental safety signals over threat signals. Experiment 2 replicates this finding and additionally compares instrumental safety signals to other action-relevant signals controlling for action relevance as cause of the effects. Experiment 3 demonstrates that when actions toward threat signals permit to avoid threat, attention prioritizes threat signals. Taken together, these results support the view that instrumentality for reaching safety determines the allocation of attention under threat.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>American Psychological Association</pub><pmid>27869466</pmid><doi>10.1037/emo0000251</doi><tpages>10</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0488-5224</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3178-2805</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0792-476X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1528-3542 |
ispartof | Emotion (Washington, D.C.), 2017-04, Vol.17 (3), p.528-537 |
issn | 1528-3542 1931-1516 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1842549414 |
source | PsycARTICLES |
subjects | Adolescent Adult Attention Attention - physiology Cues Emotions Female Human Humans Male Motivation Motivation - physiology Reaction Time - physiology Safety Threat Young Adult |
title | Safety First: Instrumentality for Reaching Safety Determines Attention Allocation Under Threat |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T21%3A19%3A50IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Safety%20First:%20Instrumentality%20for%20Reaching%20Safety%20Determines%20Attention%20Allocation%20Under%20Threat&rft.jtitle=Emotion%20(Washington,%20D.C.)&rft.au=Vogt,%20Julia&rft.date=2017-04&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=528&rft.epage=537&rft.pages=528-537&rft.issn=1528-3542&rft.eissn=1931-1516&rft_id=info:doi/10.1037/emo0000251&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1848264874%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a387t-e8bf2b187f7f1903c09da1c227b111865d39d93631c8595cd330c38854846d363%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1848264874&rft_id=info:pmid/27869466&rfr_iscdi=true |