Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
SlideShare a Scribd company logo

Understanding the self through self bias

•
•
CITE
CITE

12 January 2015, Monday 6:30 pm – 7:30 pm Theater T4, Meng Wah Complex, HKU By Prof. Glyn HUMPHREYS, Department of Experimental Psychology, Oxford University, UK Distinguished Visiting Scholar, The University of Hong Kong http://sol.edu.hku.hk/understanding-self-self-bias/

1 of 92
The biased self Glyn Humphreys Department of Experimental Psychology
Id, superego & ego: ego a form of moderation between desires and social context, to serve the purpose of the individual Physical, mental, spiritual aspects of the self Physical aspects could be transferred to objects associated with the self
These different aspects of the self have been difficult to study without relying on subjective opinion Different – more indirect - approach Study the way the self biases judgements which can be measured objectively Then to study what characterises self biases in judgements
Self bias effects  There is considerable work showing that humans show a bias towards information related to themselves  Memory (Conway et al., 1996)  Trait evaluation (Klein et al., 1989)  Face recognition (Keenan et al., 1999)
Understanding the self through self bias
Understanding the self through self bias
 However it is unclear what factors drive these effects (what aspects of the self are important? visual familiarity?)  It is unclear what type of process may be affected (enhanced perception?)  The relations between the effects and basic underlying processes (e.g., reward, emotion) remain unexplored.
 We have tried to examine these issues using new simple procedures developed to assess the associative learning of self bias  Procedures can be used for various associations other than the self [reward, emotion]  Procedures can be used to look at exactly what processes are changed by being associated with the self  Work aims to tell us – what characterises the self in self bias effects? - what processes are affected? - how does this relate to factors such as reward and emotion?
 Here I will introduce the self-association procedure to show that self-bias effects are robust and stable across individuals  Effects depend on a specific neural circuit  Effects reflect the self as a form of ‘glue’ for integrating information  Effects can be distinguished from biases reflecting reward and emotion – though influenced by both  Self-biases reflect the ‘self’ as a hub through which we integrate incoming information
Part 1: The self-association effect
You Friend Stranger
You
Stranger
You
Friend
Stranger
Stranger
 Is there a difference in matching the different shape- label combinations (Sui, He & Humphreys, 2012, JEP:HPP)?
Understanding the self through self bias
Massive self-advantage Gained within 15 learning trials
Self-bias in individuals – trait-like measure Stability: test - retest Individuals who show a strong self bias do so across different occasions Self-bias – even in such simple tasks – is a personal characteristic Linked to how individualistic the person is on questionnaire measures
Part 2: Brain mechanisms of the effects  Participants performed the self-association match task in the scanner  How do brain states change to generate the effect (Sui, Rotshtein & Humphreys, 2013, PNAS)?
vmPFC classically associated with self processing LpSTS linked to the ventral attentional network Linking of self to socially salient signal Strength of connections related to the strength of the self advantage
Activity in the classic dorsal attention control network Consistent with attention needed for the more difficult task
Opposite roles in two neural networks Self tagging - a neural circuit of vmPFC  LpSTS Self tagging - a neural circuit of vmPFC  LpSTS Other-tagging - the frontal-parietal control network Other-tagging - the frontal-parietal control network Networks compete to determine behaviour
Part 3: The nature of self bias 1.The self as perceptual and memorial glue
A redundant trial Redundancy gains occur when we have to verify the presence of a target, performance is enhanced when two targets are present relative to when only a single target appears. Redundancy gains occur when we have to verify the presence of a target, performance is enhanced when two targets are present relative to when only a single target appears. A trial with single item
A personal association task - self vs. friend A personal association task - self vs. friend Identical redundant stimuli A trial with single item Same person redundant stimuli Sui & Humphreys, in press, APP Sui, Yankouskaya, & Humphreys, in press, JEPHPP
Self advantage Formal analyses of these effects provide powerful constraints on how they occur – e.g., whether there is enhanced perceptual integration. Formal analyses of these effects provide powerful constraints on how they occur – e.g., whether there is enhanced perceptual integration.
1 = no capacity limits <1 limited capacity >1 = super capacity The self has super-capacity ‘super glue’
January 19, 2015Presentation title, edit in header and footer (view menu) Page 31 Col & shape Oxford Cambridge
The self as ‘glue’ for memory YOU FRIEND 1. Match to the label 2. Recall all items What happens to the items from the relevant categories? What happens to the irrelevant items?
Self advantage for relevant and irrelevant items Self association as glue
Self bias is linked to greater integration of stimuli in perception and in memory The self as perceptual and memorial glue Are these effects related to reward or emotion?
Part 4: Self-, reward-, and emotion-biases £8£0.5 YouFriend
Self-, reward-, and emotion-biases Effect of brain lesionEffect of brain lesion Are these the same phenomenon? Self as high reward or positive emotion?
January 19, 2015Presentation title, edit in header and footer (view menu) Page 37 Damage to left circuit – change the self advantage Damage to right circuit – reduce attentional control & increase the self advantage What happens to the effects of emotion and reward?
The left frontal lesion associated with three types of hyper-biases Frontal lesion of the executive control network
The left temporal- parietal lesion associated with hyper- self-bias only Lesion of self attention area
The left insula and vmPFC lesion associated with hypo-self and hyper-emotion Lesion of self representation
 The neuropsychological data suggest that self, reward and emotion biases are not the same phenomenon  This conclusion also supported by results where one factor is pitted against another  Self to low reward, stranger to high reward etc.
You £1 Friend £5 Stranger £15 Self trumps reward Reward beats friendship Self bias effects not simply linked to reward in any simple linear way
Conclusions: Part 1: Self-bias occurs in simple association learning. Self bias acts like an individual trait Part 2: Self bias is supported by a neural network independent of the attentional network Part 3: Self bias is sensitive to a self-reference frame and it reflects super-integration in perception and memory Part 4: Self-bias is not driven just by reward or emotion valence
Conclusions: Association with self-representation is a cognitive enhancer in perception and memory Harnessing self-bias effects may be an effective means of improving memory and perception Self bias may reflect a basic aspect of human cognition and perception – to produce enhanced attention to self relevant stimuli
Understanding the self through self bias
 GA – patient who suffered herpes simplex encephalitis – severe amnesia We assessed if his amnesia could be reduced by having him make personal associations with stimuli – objects assigned as belonging to him or sister
25% improvement from linking to the self
Overall points: Techniques of this type may have provide a new means of exploring perception in a social context Self bias modulates even basic perceptual processing – perception not isolated (Fodor, 1983) Self bias may reflect a basic aspect of human cognition and perception – to produce enhanced attention to self relevant stimuli
Overall theoretical & methodological points: Techniques of this type may have provide a new means of exploring perception in a social context Self bias modulates even basic perceptual processing – perception not isolated (Fodor, 1983) Self bias may reflect a basic aspect of human cognition and perception – to produce enhanced attention to self relevant stimuli
Thanks for your attention
 To what extent do these effects of the self reflect more basic processes – such as the self being linked to high reward (Northoff & Hayes, 2011)  Used the tagging paradigm with stimuli varying in reward £15 £5 £1
Effects of reward & contrast Effects mimic those of self association If we pit self against reward?
You £1 Friend £5 Stranger £15 Self trumps reward Reward beats friendship Technique easily extends to the assessment of other social biases
Conclusions: After <15 learning trials, neutral shapes can be tagged with social significance This changes the perceptual salience of the stimulus - self-associated shapes gain in perceptual salience There is also a change in the neural response to tagged shapes The self-bias effect does not seem ‘merely’ to reflect differential familiarity or reward
Overall points: Techniques of this type may have provide a new means of exploring perception in a social context Self bias modulates even basic perceptual processing – perception not isolated (Fodor, 1983) Self bias may reflect a basic aspect of human cognition and perception – to produce enhanced attention to self relevant stimuli
Self-, reward-, and emotion-biases Effect of brain lesionEffect of brain lesion Control data
Thanks for your attention
Part 2: Automaticity and brain circuits  How automatic are these effects?  Vary the probability with which the match pairs appear (Sui et al., APP, 2014)  Can you reduce self bias if the self only appears rarely? Self: Mother: Stranger 1: 3: 3 Self: Mother: Stranger 3: 1: 3 Self: Mother: Stranger 3: 3: 1
Performance plotted relative to when there were equal probabilities of occurrence Faster as probability varies Slower as probability varies
What happens on low probability trials? No cost for the self condition, costs on performance for mother and stranger conditions
What happens on high probability trials? Mother & Stranger Self & Mother Self & Stranger Only self gains
 On low probability trials substantial costs for low frequency ‘other’ stimuli (relative to same frequency baseline) – effects of expectancy to high frequency  Yet NO costs for self  On high probability trials, benefits for 2 high frequency ‘others’  Substantial benefits for self but NOT for paired ‘other’  Low probability trials - self advantage is automatic  High probability trials - self expectation is dominant
Self-, reward-, and emotion-biases £8£0.5 YouFriend
The left frontal lesion associated with three types of hyper-biases Self-, reward-, and emotion-biases
The left temporal- parietal lesion associated with hyper- self-bias only Self-, reward-, and emotion-biases
The left insula and vmPFC lesion associated with hypo-self and hyper-emotion Self-, reward-, and emotion-biases
 To assess effects related to the newly associated shape and the label, we examined mismatch trials 3 types of mismatch  Self shape + ‘other’ (friend/stranger) label (1)  ‘Other’ (friend/stranger) shape + self label (2)  Friend shape/label + stranger shape/label (3)  Self shape: (1) – (3)  Self label: (2) – (3)
Dynamic causal model: vmPFC - LpSTS Three family models: input entering through the LpSTS, through the vmPFC, or through both two regions.
Also varies across the age range Effect remains with RTs normalised
Activity in the classic dorsal attention control network Consistent with the more difficult task
On mismatch trials you can examine activity linked to the self shape, the self label or neither Relations between brain activity and behaviour
Effect on perception: change the contrast of the shape Effects of social association modulates effects of stimulus contrast on perceptual sensitivity Evidence for a perceptual locus Is this effect stable – like a trait measure?
 Effects of social significance can be established in simple perceptual matching tasks  Effects modulate perception (redundancy, stimulus contrast)  Effects stable across individuals over time
Part 3: Brain mechanisms of the effects  Participants performed the self-association match task in the scanner  How do brain states change to generate the effect (Sui, Rotshtein & Humphreys, 2013, PNAS)?
vmPFC classically associated with self processing LpSTS linked to the ventral attentional network Linking of self to socially salient signal
Dynamic causal model: Stronger intrinsic connectivity from vmPFC  LpSTS, the more efficient performance for matching self trials
Activity in the classic dorsal attention control network Consistent with the more difficult task
Opposite roles in two neural networks Self tagging - a neural circuit of vmPFC  LpSTS Self tagging - a neural circuit of vmPFC  LpSTS Other-tagging - the frontal-parietal control network Other-tagging - the frontal-parietal control network Sui, Rotshtein, & Humphreys, 2013, PNAS
 Conclusions:  Self-matching affected by a neural circuit connecting self representations (vmPFC)  attentional responses to sensory signals (LpSTS)  Strength of connections within this circuit determine the efficiency of behaviour to self- associated stimuli  Self-attention network distinct from the classic fronto-parietal attentrional network
Mevorach et al. (2006, Nature Neuroscience) People respond faster to whichever level is more salient, and they show less interference from the other (distractor) level
 These effects of perceptual saliency have been linked with neural control centres in posterior parietal cortex  Evidence from fMRI studies where the magnitude of interference from salient distractors in manipulated (Mevorach et al., 2009, JCoN)
Target low saliency & distractor high saliency – target high saliency & distractor low saliency Cluster along the left IPS shows increased response when high saliency distractors need to be rejected Left IPS works harder to reject such distractors? Are there similar behavioural and neural effects with social saliency?
 4 experiments  Experiment 1 – demonstrating performance with neutral shapes  Experiment 2 – demonstrating the pattern of performance when perceptual saliency of the shapes is varied  Experiment 3 – demonstrating effects of social saliency  Experiment 4 - fMRI
Experiment 1: Neutral shapes
Global < local Equal congruency effects at each level Experiment 2: Vary perceptual saliency
Understanding the self through self bias
High saliency distractors, greater interference
 Can these effects be mimicked by manipulating social rather than perceptual salience?  Hexagon  self, square  friend, circle  other  Task = identify the shape at the target level as being you or friend
Understanding the self through self bias
Effects of social saliency Maximal for self vs. friend
 Does self association change the brain’s response to stimuli  Run the local-global experiment in the scanner
Overlap of neural response to social saliency and perceptual saliency

More Related Content

Understanding the self through self bias

  • 1. The biased self Glyn Humphreys Department of Experimental Psychology
  • 2. Id, superego & ego: ego a form of moderation between desires and social context, to serve the purpose of the individual Physical, mental, spiritual aspects of the self Physical aspects could be transferred to objects associated with the self
  • 3. These different aspects of the self have been difficult to study without relying on subjective opinion Different – more indirect - approach Study the way the self biases judgements which can be measured objectively Then to study what characterises self biases in judgements
  • 4. Self bias effects  There is considerable work showing that humans show a bias towards information related to themselves  Memory (Conway et al., 1996)  Trait evaluation (Klein et al., 1989)  Face recognition (Keenan et al., 1999)
  • 7.  However it is unclear what factors drive these effects (what aspects of the self are important? visual familiarity?)  It is unclear what type of process may be affected (enhanced perception?)  The relations between the effects and basic underlying processes (e.g., reward, emotion) remain unexplored.
  • 8.  We have tried to examine these issues using new simple procedures developed to assess the associative learning of self bias  Procedures can be used for various associations other than the self [reward, emotion]  Procedures can be used to look at exactly what processes are changed by being associated with the self  Work aims to tell us – what characterises the self in self bias effects? - what processes are affected? - how does this relate to factors such as reward and emotion?
  • 9.  Here I will introduce the self-association procedure to show that self-bias effects are robust and stable across individuals  Effects depend on a specific neural circuit  Effects reflect the self as a form of ‘glue’ for integrating information  Effects can be distinguished from biases reflecting reward and emotion – though influenced by both  Self-biases reflect the ‘self’ as a hub through which we integrate incoming information
  • 10. Part 1: The self-association effect
  • 12. You
  • 14. You
  • 18.  Is there a difference in matching the different shape- label combinations (Sui, He & Humphreys, 2012, JEP:HPP)?
  • 20. Massive self-advantage Gained within 15 learning trials
  • 21. Self-bias in individuals – trait-like measure Stability: test - retest Individuals who show a strong self bias do so across different occasions Self-bias – even in such simple tasks – is a personal characteristic Linked to how individualistic the person is on questionnaire measures
  • 22. Part 2: Brain mechanisms of the effects  Participants performed the self-association match task in the scanner  How do brain states change to generate the effect (Sui, Rotshtein & Humphreys, 2013, PNAS)?
  • 23. vmPFC classically associated with self processing LpSTS linked to the ventral attentional network Linking of self to socially salient signal Strength of connections related to the strength of the self advantage
  • 24. Activity in the classic dorsal attention control network Consistent with attention needed for the more difficult task
  • 25. Opposite roles in two neural networks Self tagging - a neural circuit of vmPFC  LpSTS Self tagging - a neural circuit of vmPFC  LpSTS Other-tagging - the frontal-parietal control network Other-tagging - the frontal-parietal control network Networks compete to determine behaviour
  • 26. Part 3: The nature of self bias 1.The self as perceptual and memorial glue
  • 27. A redundant trial Redundancy gains occur when we have to verify the presence of a target, performance is enhanced when two targets are present relative to when only a single target appears. Redundancy gains occur when we have to verify the presence of a target, performance is enhanced when two targets are present relative to when only a single target appears. A trial with single item
  • 28. A personal association task - self vs. friend A personal association task - self vs. friend Identical redundant stimuli A trial with single item Same person redundant stimuli Sui & Humphreys, in press, APP Sui, Yankouskaya, & Humphreys, in press, JEPHPP
  • 29. Self advantage Formal analyses of these effects provide powerful constraints on how they occur – e.g., whether there is enhanced perceptual integration. Formal analyses of these effects provide powerful constraints on how they occur – e.g., whether there is enhanced perceptual integration.
  • 30. 1 = no capacity limits <1 limited capacity >1 = super capacity The self has super-capacity ‘super glue’
  • 31. January 19, 2015Presentation title, edit in header and footer (view menu) Page 31 Col & shape Oxford Cambridge
  • 32. The self as ‘glue’ for memory YOU FRIEND 1. Match to the label 2. Recall all items What happens to the items from the relevant categories? What happens to the irrelevant items?
  • 33. Self advantage for relevant and irrelevant items Self association as glue
  • 34. Self bias is linked to greater integration of stimuli in perception and in memory The self as perceptual and memorial glue Are these effects related to reward or emotion?
  • 35. Part 4: Self-, reward-, and emotion-biases £8£0.5 YouFriend
  • 36. Self-, reward-, and emotion-biases Effect of brain lesionEffect of brain lesion Are these the same phenomenon? Self as high reward or positive emotion?
  • 37. January 19, 2015Presentation title, edit in header and footer (view menu) Page 37 Damage to left circuit – change the self advantage Damage to right circuit – reduce attentional control & increase the self advantage What happens to the effects of emotion and reward?
  • 38. The left frontal lesion associated with three types of hyper-biases Frontal lesion of the executive control network
  • 39. The left temporal- parietal lesion associated with hyper- self-bias only Lesion of self attention area
  • 40. The left insula and vmPFC lesion associated with hypo-self and hyper-emotion Lesion of self representation
  • 41.  The neuropsychological data suggest that self, reward and emotion biases are not the same phenomenon  This conclusion also supported by results where one factor is pitted against another  Self to low reward, stranger to high reward etc.
  • 42. You £1 Friend £5 Stranger £15 Self trumps reward Reward beats friendship Self bias effects not simply linked to reward in any simple linear way
  • 43. Conclusions: Part 1: Self-bias occurs in simple association learning. Self bias acts like an individual trait Part 2: Self bias is supported by a neural network independent of the attentional network Part 3: Self bias is sensitive to a self-reference frame and it reflects super-integration in perception and memory Part 4: Self-bias is not driven just by reward or emotion valence
  • 44. Conclusions: Association with self-representation is a cognitive enhancer in perception and memory Harnessing self-bias effects may be an effective means of improving memory and perception Self bias may reflect a basic aspect of human cognition and perception – to produce enhanced attention to self relevant stimuli
  • 46.  GA – patient who suffered herpes simplex encephalitis – severe amnesia We assessed if his amnesia could be reduced by having him make personal associations with stimuli – objects assigned as belonging to him or sister
  • 47. 25% improvement from linking to the self
  • 48. Overall points: Techniques of this type may have provide a new means of exploring perception in a social context Self bias modulates even basic perceptual processing – perception not isolated (Fodor, 1983) Self bias may reflect a basic aspect of human cognition and perception – to produce enhanced attention to self relevant stimuli
  • 49. Overall theoretical & methodological points: Techniques of this type may have provide a new means of exploring perception in a social context Self bias modulates even basic perceptual processing – perception not isolated (Fodor, 1983) Self bias may reflect a basic aspect of human cognition and perception – to produce enhanced attention to self relevant stimuli
  • 50. Thanks for your attention
  • 51.  To what extent do these effects of the self reflect more basic processes – such as the self being linked to high reward (Northoff & Hayes, 2011)  Used the tagging paradigm with stimuli varying in reward £15 £5 £1
  • 52. Effects of reward & contrast Effects mimic those of self association If we pit self against reward?
  • 53. You £1 Friend £5 Stranger £15 Self trumps reward Reward beats friendship Technique easily extends to the assessment of other social biases
  • 54. Conclusions: After <15 learning trials, neutral shapes can be tagged with social significance This changes the perceptual salience of the stimulus - self-associated shapes gain in perceptual salience There is also a change in the neural response to tagged shapes The self-bias effect does not seem ‘merely’ to reflect differential familiarity or reward
  • 55. Overall points: Techniques of this type may have provide a new means of exploring perception in a social context Self bias modulates even basic perceptual processing – perception not isolated (Fodor, 1983) Self bias may reflect a basic aspect of human cognition and perception – to produce enhanced attention to self relevant stimuli
  • 56. Self-, reward-, and emotion-biases Effect of brain lesionEffect of brain lesion Control data
  • 57. Thanks for your attention
  • 58. Part 2: Automaticity and brain circuits  How automatic are these effects?  Vary the probability with which the match pairs appear (Sui et al., APP, 2014)  Can you reduce self bias if the self only appears rarely? Self: Mother: Stranger 1: 3: 3 Self: Mother: Stranger 3: 1: 3 Self: Mother: Stranger 3: 3: 1
  • 59. Performance plotted relative to when there were equal probabilities of occurrence Faster as probability varies Slower as probability varies
  • 60. What happens on low probability trials? No cost for the self condition, costs on performance for mother and stranger conditions
  • 61. What happens on high probability trials? Mother & Stranger Self & Mother Self & Stranger Only self gains
  • 62.  On low probability trials substantial costs for low frequency ‘other’ stimuli (relative to same frequency baseline) – effects of expectancy to high frequency  Yet NO costs for self  On high probability trials, benefits for 2 high frequency ‘others’  Substantial benefits for self but NOT for paired ‘other’  Low probability trials - self advantage is automatic  High probability trials - self expectation is dominant
  • 63. Self-, reward-, and emotion-biases £8£0.5 YouFriend
  • 64. The left frontal lesion associated with three types of hyper-biases Self-, reward-, and emotion-biases
  • 65. The left temporal- parietal lesion associated with hyper- self-bias only Self-, reward-, and emotion-biases
  • 66. The left insula and vmPFC lesion associated with hypo-self and hyper-emotion Self-, reward-, and emotion-biases
  • 67.  To assess effects related to the newly associated shape and the label, we examined mismatch trials 3 types of mismatch  Self shape + ‘other’ (friend/stranger) label (1)  ‘Other’ (friend/stranger) shape + self label (2)  Friend shape/label + stranger shape/label (3)  Self shape: (1) – (3)  Self label: (2) – (3)
  • 68. Dynamic causal model: vmPFC - LpSTS Three family models: input entering through the LpSTS, through the vmPFC, or through both two regions.
  • 69. Also varies across the age range Effect remains with RTs normalised
  • 70. Activity in the classic dorsal attention control network Consistent with the more difficult task
  • 71. On mismatch trials you can examine activity linked to the self shape, the self label or neither Relations between brain activity and behaviour
  • 72. Effect on perception: change the contrast of the shape Effects of social association modulates effects of stimulus contrast on perceptual sensitivity Evidence for a perceptual locus Is this effect stable – like a trait measure?
  • 73.  Effects of social significance can be established in simple perceptual matching tasks  Effects modulate perception (redundancy, stimulus contrast)  Effects stable across individuals over time
  • 74. Part 3: Brain mechanisms of the effects  Participants performed the self-association match task in the scanner  How do brain states change to generate the effect (Sui, Rotshtein & Humphreys, 2013, PNAS)?
  • 75. vmPFC classically associated with self processing LpSTS linked to the ventral attentional network Linking of self to socially salient signal
  • 76. Dynamic causal model: Stronger intrinsic connectivity from vmPFC  LpSTS, the more efficient performance for matching self trials
  • 77. Activity in the classic dorsal attention control network Consistent with the more difficult task
  • 78. Opposite roles in two neural networks Self tagging - a neural circuit of vmPFC  LpSTS Self tagging - a neural circuit of vmPFC  LpSTS Other-tagging - the frontal-parietal control network Other-tagging - the frontal-parietal control network Sui, Rotshtein, & Humphreys, 2013, PNAS
  • 79.  Conclusions:  Self-matching affected by a neural circuit connecting self representations (vmPFC)  attentional responses to sensory signals (LpSTS)  Strength of connections within this circuit determine the efficiency of behaviour to self- associated stimuli  Self-attention network distinct from the classic fronto-parietal attentrional network
  • 80. Mevorach et al. (2006, Nature Neuroscience) People respond faster to whichever level is more salient, and they show less interference from the other (distractor) level
  • 81.  These effects of perceptual saliency have been linked with neural control centres in posterior parietal cortex  Evidence from fMRI studies where the magnitude of interference from salient distractors in manipulated (Mevorach et al., 2009, JCoN)
  • 82. Target low saliency & distractor high saliency – target high saliency & distractor low saliency Cluster along the left IPS shows increased response when high saliency distractors need to be rejected Left IPS works harder to reject such distractors? Are there similar behavioural and neural effects with social saliency?
  • 83.  4 experiments  Experiment 1 – demonstrating performance with neutral shapes  Experiment 2 – demonstrating the pattern of performance when perceptual saliency of the shapes is varied  Experiment 3 – demonstrating effects of social saliency  Experiment 4 - fMRI
  • 85. Global < local Equal congruency effects at each level Experiment 2: Vary perceptual saliency
  • 87. High saliency distractors, greater interference
  • 88.  Can these effects be mimicked by manipulating social rather than perceptual salience?  Hexagon  self, square  friend, circle  other  Task = identify the shape at the target level as being you or friend
  • 90. Effects of social saliency Maximal for self vs. friend
  • 91.  Does self association change the brain’s response to stimuli  Run the local-global experiment in the scanner
  • 92. Overlap of neural response to social saliency and perceptual saliency

Editor's Notes

  1. In contrast to the first results, there are also different effects of self and reward. We look at the individual difference
  2. Neural circuit involves increased functional connectivity between vmPFC and pSTS This circuit is distinct from the fronto-parietal attentional control network – two may be opposed in generating behaviour
  3. Redundancy gain - when we have to verify the presence of a target, performance is enhanced when two targets are present relative to when only a single target appears. There is evidence that these redundancy gains can reflect enhanced perceptual processing of stimuli, an effect that is modulated by whether the stimuli are coded as part of a common object representation (Mordkoff &amp; Danek, 2011). Most studies have assessed redundancy gains based on simple perceptual properties of stimuli (e.g, their color or orientation) and we have sparse evidence on whether higher-level processes modulate the effects.
  4. Redundant self stimuli alone both violated the independent race model and were processed with super-capacity. In contrast, the redundant high reward stimuli did not show race inequality and were associated with limited capacity processing. The data advance our theoretical understanding of self bias both by demonstrating that it can be distinguished from effects of reward, and by suggesting that self-bias can result from the enhanced integration of stimuli associated with the self.
  5. separat
  6. imaging
  7. separat
  8. imaging
  9. Neural circuit involves increased functional connectivity between vmPFC and pSTS This circuit is distinct from the fronto-parietal attentional control network – two may be opposed in generating behaviour