On the reliability of value‑modulated attentional capture: An online replication and multiverse analysis
Metadatos
Mostrar el registro completo del ítemEditorial
Springer Nature
Materia
Value-modulated attentional capture Visual search Learning
Fecha
2024-01-09Referencia bibliográfica
Garre-Frutos, F., Vadillo, M.A., González, F. et al. On the reliability of value-modulated attentional capture: An online replication and multiverse analysis. Behav Res (2024). https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-023-02329-5
Patrocinador
Funding for open access publishing: Universidad de Granada/ CBUA.; Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033) research projects PID2020-114790GB-I00, PID2020-118583GB-I00, CNS2022-135346, PID2021-127985NB-I00; FPU predoctoral grant (ref. FPU20/01987)Resumen
Stimuli predicting rewards are more likely to capture attention, even when they are not relevant to our current goals. Individual
differences in value-modulated attentional capture (VMAC) have been associated with various psychopathological conditions
in the scientific literature. However, the claim that this attentional bias can predict individual differences requires further
exploration of the psychometric properties of the most common experimental paradigms. The current study replicated the
VMAC effect in a large online sample (N = 182) and investigated the internal consistency, with a design that allowed us to
measure the effect during learning (rewarded phase) and after acquisition, once feedback was omitted (unrewarded phase).
Through the rewarded phase there was gradual increase of the VMAC effect, which did not decline significantly throughout
the unrewarded phase. Furthermore, we conducted a reliability multiverse analysis for 288 different data preprocessing specifications
across both phases. Specifications including more blocks in the analysis led to better reliability estimates in both
phases, while specifications that removed more outliers also improved reliability, suggesting that specifications with more,
but less noisy, trials led to better reliability estimates. Nevertheless, in most instances, especially those considering fewer
blocks of trials, reliability estimates fell below the minimum recommended thresholds for research on individual differences.
Given the present results, we encourage researchers working on VMAC to take into account reliability when designing studies
aimed at capturing individual differences and provide recommendations to improve methodological practices.