Self-association enhances early attentional selection through automatic prioritization of socially salient signals

preprint OA: closed
📄 Open PDF Full text JSON View at publisher
Full text 1,869 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
Abstract Efficiently processing self-related information is critical for cognition, yet the earliest mechanisms enabling this self-prioritization remain unclear. By combining a temporal order judgement task with computational modelling based on the Theory of Visual Attention (TVA), we show how mere, arbitrary associations with the self can fundamentally alter attentional selection of sensory information into short-term memory/awareness, by enhancing the attentional weights and processing capacity devoted to encoding socially loaded information. This self-prioritization in attentional selection occurs automatically at early perceptual stages but reduces when active social decoding is required. Importantly, the processing benefits obtained from attentional selection via self-relatedness and via physical salience were additive, suggesting that social and perceptual salience captured attention via separate mechanisms. Furthermore, intra-individual correlations revealed an ‘obligatory’ self-prioritization effect, whereby self-relatedness overpowered the contribution of perceptual salience in guiding attentional selection. Together, our findings provide evidence for the influence of self-relatedness during earlier, automatic stages of attentional section at the gateway to perception, distinct from later post-attentive processing stages. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. Footnotes meike.scheller{at}durham.ac.uk jie.sui{at}abdn.ac.uk Revision following reviewer recommendations: - Added summary sentences in results - added methodological details (task outline) earlier in the manuscript, i.e. to Figure 3 + caption - wording of Q2 was updated to align better with the experimental manipulations and conclusions - removed terms such as "slightly" and "roughly" where they would cause confusion and uncertainty

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2024) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00