{
  "paper": "scheller-2026-self-prioritization",
  "claims": 23,
  "panels": {
    "total": [
      "fig1",
      "fig2",
      "fig3a",
      "fig3b",
      "fig3c",
      "fig4",
      "fig4s1",
      "fig5",
      "fig5s1",
      "fig5s2",
      "fig6",
      "fig6s1",
      "fig6s2",
      "fig7",
      "fig7s1",
      "fig8",
      "fig9",
      "fig10",
      "fig11",
      "table1",
      "table2"
    ],
    "orphan": [
      "fig1",
      "fig2",
      "fig3a",
      "fig3b",
      "fig3c",
      "fig4s1",
      "fig5s1",
      "fig5s2",
      "fig6s1",
      "fig6s2",
      "fig7s1",
      "fig10",
      "fig11",
      "table2"
    ],
    "figure_level": [],
    "phantom": [],
    "pct": 33.3
  },
  "statistics": {
    "total": 0,
    "orphan": [],
    "pct": 100.0
  },
  "spans": {
    "segmented": 407,
    "obligations": 64,
    "textual": 343,
    "accounted": 36,
    "pct": 56.2,
    "orphans": [
      {
        "uid": "introduction-013",
        "section": "introduction",
        "text": "As a model of attention-biased stimulus encoding, the Theory of Visual Attention (TVA; Bundesen, 1990 ) formally describes mechanisms underpinning prior entry (; T\u00fcnnermann et al., 2017 ; Figure 1 ).",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "fig1"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "introduction-020",
        "section": "introduction",
        "text": "Figure 1. Mechanisms of attentional selection.",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "fig1"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "introduction-050",
        "section": "introduction",
        "text": "(Experiment 1) (H2) Based on previous findings ( Constable et al., 2019 ; Jublie and Kumar, 2021 ; Truong et al., 2017 ), we hypothesized that participants would show a bias toward self-associated information when the decisional dimension requires the explicit decoding of the social identity ( Figure 2 , lower panel).",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "fig2"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "introduction-051",
        "section": "introduction",
        "text": "If self-relatedness also biases attentional selection automatically at the perceptual feature level, self-related information should show higher relative attentional weights/absolute processing rates even when the decisional dimension does not require the explicit decoding of social identities, but merely of their associated perceptual feature (shapes; Figure 2 , upper panel).",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "fig2"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "introduction-053",
        "section": "introduction",
        "text": "Figure 2. Decision dimensions.",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "fig2"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "introduction-068",
        "section": "introduction",
        "text": "Using a TOJ task with stimuli in which shape features have been arbitrarily associated with the self and a stranger identity ( Figure 3 ), we measured whether mere social associations lead to a differential allocation of attention across the visual field, or an increase/decrease in processing rates for self- and other-associated stimuli.",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "fig3"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "introduction-072",
        "section": "introduction",
        "text": "Figure 3. Task design.",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "fig3"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "results-016",
        "section": "results",
        "text": "Figure 4\u2014figure supplement 1. Individual estimates: Absolute processing rates ( v p \\begin{document}$v_{p}$\\end{document} ) for the probe stimulus (self-associated), shown for individual participants for the social baseline (gray; v p B a s e S o c \\begin{document}$v_{pBaseSoc}$\\end{document} ) and the social salience condition in which the identity had to be reported (dark blue; v p S o c \\begin{document}$v_{pSoc}$\\end{document} ).",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "fig4s1"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "results-026",
        "section": "results",
        "text": "Consequently, social salience introduced not only a change in attentional weights across the perceptual objects, but also a change in processing capacity (see Figure 1c ).",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "fig1c"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "results-052",
        "section": "results",
        "text": "Raw response data and parameter estimates for individual participants are provided in Figure 5\u2014figure supplement 1 and 2 , respectively.",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "fig5s1"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "results-053",
        "section": "results",
        "text": "Figure 5\u2014figure supplement 1. Individual psychometric functions: Individual participant response data indicating the proportion with which participants responded that the probe flickered first as a function of stimulus onset (flicker) asynchrony.",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "fig5s1"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "results-058",
        "section": "results",
        "text": "Figure 5\u2014figure supplement 2. Individual estimates: absolute processing rates ( v p \\begin{document}${v}_{p}$\\end{document} ) for the probe stimulus (self-associated), shown for individual participants in Experiment 1. Different colors indicate different conditions: the baseline (gray; v p B a s e \\begin{document}$v_{pBase}$\\end{document} ), the social salience condition in which the shape had to be reported (light blue; v p S o c P e r \\begin{document}$v_{pSocPer}$\\end{document} ) and the social salience condition in which the identity had to be reported (dark blue; v p S o c S o c \\begin{document}$v_{pSocSoc}$\\end{document} ).",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "fig5s2"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "results-096",
        "section": "results",
        "text": "Figure 6\u2014figure supplement 1. Individual psychometric functions: Individual participant response data indicating the proportion with which participants responded that the probe flickered first as a function of stimulus onset (flicker) asynchrony.",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "fig6s1"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "results-098",
        "section": "results",
        "text": "Figure 6\u2014figure supplement 2. Individual estimates: Absolute processing rates ( v p \\begin{document}$v_{p}$\\end{document} ) for the probe stimulus (perceptually salient), shown for individual participants for the baseline (gray; v p B a s e \\begin{document}$v_{pBase}$\\end{document} ), for the mere perceptual salience condition (orange; v p P e r c \\begin{document}$v_{pPerc}$\\end{document} ), for the perceptual salience condition in which the probe was self-associated (purple; v p P e r S e l f \\begin{document}$v_{pPerSelf}$\\end{document} ), and the perceptual salience condition in which the probe was other-associated (pink; v p P e r O t h e r \\begin{document}$v_{pPerOther}$\\end{document} ).",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "fig6s2"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "results-109",
        "section": "results",
        "text": "To that end, we added the processing rate changes resulting from perceptual salience alone and social associations alone and subtracted them from the processing rate changes in the condition in which perceptual salience and social associations were presented together (see Figure 7\u2014figure supplement 1 ).",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "fig7s1"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "results-115",
        "section": "results",
        "text": "Figure 7\u2014figure supplement 1. Formalization of interaction: formalization of interaction effect assessment, using attentional weights.",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "fig7s1"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "results-148",
        "section": "results",
        "text": "For self-associated shapes, on the other hand, mere social salience effects were the best predictor ( B F i n c l u s i o n \\begin{document}$BF_{inclusion}$\\end{document} =2458.52) while a susceptibility to mere perceptual salience also contributed ( B F i n c l u s i o n \\begin{document}$BF_{inclusion}$\\end{document} =153.25; Table 2 ).",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "table2"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "results-152",
        "section": "results",
        "text": "Coefficient P(incl) P(incl|Data) B F i n c l u s i o n \\begin{document}$BF_{inclusion}$\\end{document} Mean SD C I 95 \\begin{document}$CI^{95}$\\end{document} Lower C I 95 \\begin{document}$CI^{95}$\\end{document} Upper Intercept 1.000 1.000 1.0 0.052 0.011 0.031 0.073 \u0394 w p P e r \\begin{document}$\\Delta{w_{p}^{Per}}$\\end{document} 0.556 1.000 4638.74 0.833 0.200 0.434 1.232 \u0394 w p S o c \\begin{document}$\\Delta{w_{p}^{Soc}}$\\end{document} 0.556 0.779 2.83 \u20131.191 0.624 \u20132.435 0.053 \u0394 w p P e r \\begin{document}$\\Delta{w_{p}^{Per}}$\\end{document} * \u0394 w p S o c \\begin{document}$\\Delta{w_{p}^{Soc}}$\\end{document} 0.333 0.414 1.42 6.081 6.667 \u20137.216 19.378 Table 2. Posterior coefficient summaries for perceptual salience and self-association.",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "table2"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "captions-001",
        "section": "captions",
        "text": "=== Figure 1 === Figure 1. Mechanisms of attentional selection.",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "fig1"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "captions-010",
        "section": "captions",
        "text": "To arbitrate between these two mechanisms, we employed model comparisons to assess whether changes in relative attentional weight or changes in absolute processing rates (capacity and weights) better explained experimental data. === Figure 2 === Figure 2. Decision dimensions.",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "fig2"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "captions-017",
        "section": "captions",
        "text": "Note that the directionality of the sensory and social information does not make assumptions about the temporal dynamics of the underlying process. === Figure 3 === Figure 3. Task design.",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "fig3"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "captions-047",
        "section": "captions",
        "text": "Absolute processing rate changes for the probe (self-associated) and reference (other-associated) shapes, as well as their relative change, are shown on the bottom right. === Figure 4s1 === Figure 4\u2014figure supplement 1. Individual estimates: Absolute processing rates ( v p \\begin{document}$v_{p}$\\end{document} ) for the probe stimulus (self-associated), shown for individual participants for the social baseline (gray; v p B a s e S o c \\begin{document}$v_{pBaseSoc}$\\end{document} ) and the social salience condition in which the identity had to be reported (dark blue; v p S o c \\begin{document}$v_{pSoc}$\\end{document} ).",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "fig4s1"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "captions-054",
        "section": "captions",
        "text": "Raw response data and parameter estimates for individual participants are provided in Figure 5\u2014figure supplement 1 and 2 , respectively. === Figure 5s1 === Figure 5\u2014figure supplement 1. Individual psychometric functions: Individual participant response data indicating the proportion with which participants responded that the probe flickered first as a function of stimulus onset (flicker) asynchrony.",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "fig5s1"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "captions-058",
        "section": "captions",
        "text": "Furthermore, this participant shows a decreased proportion of \u2018probe first\u2019 responses when the probe was self-associated and the social identity had to be reported. === Figure 5s2 === Figure 5\u2014figure supplement 2. Individual estimates: absolute processing rates ( v p \\begin{document}${v}_{p}$\\end{document} ) for the probe stimulus (self-associated), shown for individual participants in Experiment 1. Different colors indicate different conditions: the baseline (gray; v p B a s e \\begin{document}$v_{pBase}$\\end{document} ), the social salience condition in which the shape had to be reported (light blue; v p S o c P e r \\begin{document}$v_{pSocPer}$\\end{document} ) and the social salience condition in which the identity had to be reported (dark blue; v p S o c S o c \\begin{document}$v_{pSocSoc}$\\end{document} ).",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "fig5s2"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "captions-067",
        "section": "captions",
        "text": "Different conditions are shown in different shadings. === Figure 6s2 === Figure 6\u2014figure supplement 2. Individual estimates: Absolute processing rates ( v p \\begin{document}$v_{p}$\\end{document} ) for the probe stimulus (perceptually salient), shown for individual participants for the baseline (gray; v p B a s e \\begin{document}$v_{pBase}$\\end{document} ), for the mere perceptual salience condition (orange; v p P e r c \\begin{document}$v_{pPerc}$\\end{document} ), for the perceptual salience condition in which the probe was self-associated (purple; v p P e r S e l f \\begin{document}$v_{pPerSelf}$\\end{document} ), and the perceptual salience condition in which the probe was other-associated (pink; v p P e r O t h e r \\begin{document}$v_{pPerOther}$\\end{document} ).",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "fig6s2"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "captions-072",
        "section": "captions",
        "text": "The right panel shows the difference in perceptual-salience induced processing benefit between the self- and other-associated stimuli. === Figure 7s1 === Figure 7\u2014figure supplement 1. Formalization of interaction: formalization of interaction effect assessment, using attentional weights.",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "fig7s1"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "captions-082",
        "section": "captions",
        "text": "Bayes factors assessing the probability of a linear correlation and posterior estimation info is provided above each plot. === Figure 10 === Figure 10. Parameter estimates and their respective uncertainties for social and perceptual salience. === Figure 11 === Figure 11. Estimated power for observing a reliable self-bias in attentional selection for the perceptual salience (orange solid line) and social salience (green dashed line) conditions.",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "fig10",
          "fig11"
        ]
      },
      {
        "uid": "tables-002",
        "section": "tables",
        "text": "Coefficient P(incl) P(incl|Data) B F i n c l u s i o n \\begin{document}$BF_{inclusion}$\\end{document} Mean SD C I 95 \\begin{document}$CI^{95}$\\end{document} Lower C I 95 \\begin{document}$CI^{95}$\\end{document} Upper Intercept 1.000 1.000 1.0 0.052 0.011 0.031 0.073 \u0394 w p P e r \\begin{document}$\\Delta{w_{p}^{Per}}$\\end{document} 0.556 1.000 4638.74 0.833 0.200 0.434 1.232 \u0394 w p S o c \\begin{document}$\\Delta{w_{p}^{Soc}}$\\end{document} 0.556 0.779 2.83 \u20131.191 0.624 \u20132.435 0.053 \u0394 w p P e r \\begin{document}$\\Delta{w_{p}^{Per}}$\\end{document} * \u0394 w p S o c \\begin{document}$\\Delta{w_{p}^{Soc}}$\\end{document} 0.333 0.414 1.42 6.081 6.667 \u20137.216 19.378 Table 2. Posterior coefficient summaries for perceptual salience and self-association.",
        "stats": [],
        "panels": [
          "table2"
        ]
      }
    ]
  }
}