{ "type": "Document", "metadata": { "doi": "10.7554/eLife.100932", "title": "Self-association enhances early attentional selection through automatic prioritization of socially salient signals", "authors": [ "Meike Scheller", "Jan Tünnermann", "Katja Fredriksson", "Huilin Fang", "Jie Sui" ] }, "children": [ { "type": "ClaimGraph", "identifier": "scheller-2026-self-prioritization-claims", "children": [ { "type": "Claim", "identifier": "decisional-dimension-tradeoff", "role": "empirical", "children": [ { "type": "Text", "value": "Across individuals, processing rate changes in the social decision dimension and the perceptual decision dimension are negatively correlated (r = -0.243, BF10 = 6.58), driven by differential allocation of relative attentional weights (r = -0.268, BF10 = 16.93): individuals who show stronger automatic self-prioritization at the perceptual level show less facilitation of self-associated information at the social level." } ], "epistemicStrength": "moderate", "relations": [ { "xref": "spe-matching-correlates-social-decision", "relationType": "cito:disagreesWith" }, { "xref": "hypothesis-self-association-alters-attentional-selection", "relationType": "cito:confirms" }, { "xref": "self-prioritization-perceptual-decision-automatic", "relationType": "claimrel:requires" }, { "xref": "self-prioritization-absent-social-decision", "relationType": "claimrel:requires" } ], "metadata": { "uuid": "25ad6b4e-1066-424b-b337-98b5188b5553", "concepts": [ "individual differences", "decisional dimension", "attentional trade-off", "negative correlation", "self-prioritization" ] } }, { "type": "Claim", "identifier": "hypothesis-capacity-mechanism-not-weights", "role": "hypothesis", "children": [ { "type": "Text", "value": "The mechanism by which self-association enhances perceptual processing is a change in the absolute Theory-of-Visual-Attention processing capacity (the C parameter, which governs total resources available for encoding into aware short-term memory) rather than a pure redistribution of fixed attentional weights (the w parameter) between the two competing stimuli. Under a fixed-capacity, weights-only account, the brain would trade off self-related processing against other-related processing within a constant total budget, so a single-C TVA model with condition-specific w should fit the data as well as a model that allows C itself to vary by condition. The capacity-change hypothesis predicts the opposite — that a model in which C changes between baseline, perceptual-decision, and social-decision contexts should fit substantially better." } ], "panel": [ "hypothesis" ], "relations": [ { "xref": "prediction-capacity-model-outperforms-weights-only", "relationType": "claimrel:entails" }, { "xref": "interprets-bundesen-tva-framework", "relationType": "claimrel:interprets" } ], "metadata": { "uuid": "ffda88f6-50da-4d01-8e5e-739350f96526", "concepts": [ "TVA processing capacity", "attentional weights", "mechanism", "resource mobilisation", "model-based inference" ], "displayClaim": "Self-association acts via absolute processing capacity (TVA C parameter), not merely through redistribution of fixed attentional weights — predicting that condition-specific C should fit better than a single-C model.", "shortClaim": "Self-association raises absolute processing capacity, not merely attentional weights." } }, { "type": "Claim", "identifier": "hypothesis-self-association-alters-attentional-selection", "role": "hypothesis", "children": [ { "type": "Text", "value": "Mere arbitrary association of an otherwise neutral perceptual feature (a shape) with the self alters early attentional selection of that feature into aware short-term memory: the self-association acts as an attentional salience signal that shifts processing rates in the Theory of Visual Attention framework. This signal operates automatically at the perceptual feature level — it does not require explicit decoding of the social identity of the stimulus to take effect, and it should be detectable in tasks (such as the temporal order judgement) that demand only a perceptual report. A corollary is that requiring an explicit social-identity decision should change, and may even reverse, the signature of the effect, because the decision context redirects the perceptual stream away from the otherwise-automatic self-prioritisation." } ], "panel": [ "hypothesis" ], "relations": [ { "xref": "prediction-self-advantage-perceptual-decision", "relationType": "claimrel:entails" }, { "xref": "prediction-self-advantage-attenuated-social-decision", "relationType": "claimrel:entails" } ], "metadata": { "uuid": "7602af86-ca7d-4e6e-9c19-22e0e4bf5b47", "concepts": [ "self-prioritization", "attentional selection", "automatic processing", "Theory of Visual Attention", "perceptual feature level" ], "displayClaim": "Arbitrary self-association acts as an automatic attentional salience signal at the perceptual feature level — detectable in TOJ tasks that demand only a perceptual report, and modulated (or reversed) by the social-decision context.", "shortClaim": "Self-association acts as an automatic perceptual-level salience signal." } }, { "type": "Claim", "identifier": "hypothesis-social-perceptual-independent-mechanisms", "role": "hypothesis", "children": [ { "type": "Text", "value": "Social salience (driven by self-association or other-association) and perceptual salience (driven by physical properties such as local colour contrast) capture attention via largely independent mechanisms. If true, the two salience signals should combine additively when they co-occur on the same stimulus — the processing rate change for a stimulus that is both socially and perceptually salient should approximately equal the sum of the two signals' individual contributions, with no reliable interaction term. The hypothesis is testable in Experiment 2, where social association (self vs other) is crossed with perceptual salience (high-contrast vs low-contrast) within the same TOJ paradigm." } ], "panel": [ "hypothesis" ], "relations": [ { "xref": "prediction-additive-effects-other-associated", "relationType": "claimrel:entails" } ], "metadata": { "uuid": "72d45d61-25fa-4831-b57e-3a7da5d097e3", "concepts": [ "independent mechanisms", "social salience", "perceptual salience", "additivity", "factorial design" ], "displayClaim": "Social and perceptual salience capture attention via largely independent mechanisms, predicting additive (non-interacting) effects when both occur on the same stimulus.", "shortClaim": "Social and perceptual salience capture attention via independent, additive mechanisms." } }, { "type": "Claim", "identifier": "interprets-bundesen-tva-framework", "role": "literature-context", "children": [ { "type": "Text", "value": "The Theory of Visual Attention (TVA), formalized by Bundesen (1990, Psychological Review) and developed further by Bundesen, Habekost, Kyllingsbæk and colleagues, decomposes visual attentional selection into a fixed set of parameters — processing capacity (C), attentional weights (w), perceptual threshold (t0), and visual short-term memory capacity (K) — and generates quantitative predictions for whole-report, partial-report, and temporal-order-judgement paradigms. The framework is the canonical quantitative decomposition of attentional selection into absolute resource (C) versus relative weighting (w) components, and its model-fitting machinery is the standard way the C-versus-w distinction is operationalized empirically." } ], "epistemicStrength": "moderate", "metadata": { "uuid": "4518f433-c0d6-4313-bbed-2d7357442d4e", "doi": "10.1037/0033-295x.97.4.523", "concepts": [ "Theory of Visual Attention", "processing capacity C", "attentional weights w", "mechanism decomposition", "theoretical framework" ], "displayClaim": "Bundesen's Theory of Visual Attention (TVA) decomposes attentional selection into processing capacity C, attentional weights w, and related parameters — the standard quantitative framework for distinguishing resource-mobilisation from weight-redistribution mechanisms.", "shortClaim": "TVA (Bundesen 1990) is the standard framework decomposing attention into C and w parameters." } }, { "type": "Claim", "identifier": "other-association-advantage-social-condition", "role": "empirical", "children": [ { "type": "Text", "value": "In Experiment 2, other-associated stimuli show a processing rate advantage over self-associated stimuli of -1.6 Hz [HDI95: -3 to -0.26 Hz] relative to neutral baseline in the social decision condition, replicating the cross-experimental finding that social decoding context reverses or eliminates the self-advantage." } ], "epistemicStrength": "moderate", "relations": [ { "xref": "prediction-self-advantage-attenuated-social-decision", "relationType": "claimrel:tests" }, { "xref": "self-prioritization-absent-social-decision", "relationType": "cito:confirms" }, { "xref": "hypothesis-self-association-alters-attentional-selection", "relationType": "cito:confirms" }, { "xref": "tva-capacity-model-wins", "relationType": "claimrel:requires" }, { "xref": "self-prioritization-automatic-early", "relationType": "cito:supports" }, { "xref": "decisional-dimension-tradeoff", "relationType": "cito:supports" } ], "metadata": { "uuid": "08433979-b40e-4b78-91f6-80537bb4c971", "concepts": [ "other-association advantage", "social decision condition", "Experiment 2", "replication", "TVA processing rates" ] } }, { "type": "Claim", "identifier": "perceptual-salience-6hz-advantage", "role": "control", "children": [ { "type": "Text", "value": "Perceptual salience (local color contrast) produces a 6 Hz processing rate advantage for the salient stimulus [HDI95: 4.6 to 7.3 Hz] in Experiment 2, driven by a 2.5 Hz increase in the salient stimulus rate [HDI95: 0.8 to 4.2 Hz] and a 3.4 Hz decrease in the non-salient stimulus rate [HDI95: -4.9 to -2.0 Hz]." } ], "epistemicStrength": "strong", "relations": [ { "xref": "self-social-additive-perceptual", "relationType": "cito:confirms" }, { "xref": "self-salience-reduces-perceptual-benefit", "relationType": "cito:confirms" }, { "xref": "self-salience-reduces-perceptual-benefit", "relationType": "cito:supports" }, { "xref": "social-perceptual-salience-independent-streams", "relationType": "cito:supports" } ], "metadata": { "uuid": "daed2cbb-ce65-4207-9a91-b0160ebf8afa", "concepts": [ "perceptual salience", "processing rate advantage", "salient stimulus", "attentional selection", "TVA" ] } }, { "type": "Claim", "identifier": "prediction-additive-effects-other-associated", "role": "prediction", "children": [ { "type": "Text", "value": "If social and perceptual salience operate via independent mechanisms, then for stimuli that are simultaneously socially salient (other-associated) and perceptually salient (high local contrast) the observed processing rate change should equal — within statistical uncertainty — the sum of the social-only and perceptual-only effects estimated from the marginal conditions, with the interaction term not reliably distinguishable from zero. The prediction is most cleanly testable in Experiment 2's factorial design, where social association (self / other / neutral) is crossed with perceptual salience (high-contrast / low-contrast). For self-associated stimuli the prediction is held in reserve — any deviation from additivity in the self condition would localise the exception rather than refute the general independence claim." } ], "panel": [ "prediction" ], "relations": [ { "xref": "hypothesis-social-perceptual-independent-mechanisms", "relationType": "cito:citesAsSourceDocument" } ], "metadata": { "uuid": "60793515-ebbb-4ad0-a8ed-3c5772ad809d", "concepts": [ "prediction", "additivity", "independent mechanisms", "factorial design", "interaction term" ], "displayClaim": "For other-associated stimuli, social and perceptual salience effects should be additive in Experiment 2 — the interaction term should not reliably differ from zero if independence holds." } }, { "type": "Claim", "identifier": "prediction-capacity-model-outperforms-weights-only", "role": "prediction", "children": [ { "type": "Text", "value": "If self-association mobilises additional encoding capacity rather than merely redistributing fixed attentional weights, a hierarchical TVA model in which the C parameter is allowed to take a separate value in each experimental condition should fit the participant-level data substantially better than a single-C model in which capacity is held fixed across conditions and only the relative weights vary. Operationally, on a leave-one-out cross-validation comparison the indiv-C model should win on Δloo and on the model-stacking weight, with the magnitude large enough to be taken seriously after accounting for the standard error of the difference." } ], "panel": [ "prediction" ], "relations": [ { "xref": "hypothesis-capacity-mechanism-not-weights", "relationType": "cito:citesAsSourceDocument" } ], "metadata": { "uuid": "047cb8a3-9c95-4241-9dd1-d9c8f6343df0", "concepts": [ "prediction", "model comparison", "LOO cross-validation", "TVA C parameter", "hierarchical Bayesian" ], "displayClaim": "A condition-specific TVA capacity model (indiv-C) should outperform a fixed-capacity, weights-only model on LOO cross-validation if the mechanism is capacity change rather than pure weight redistribution." } }, { "type": "Claim", "identifier": "prediction-self-advantage-attenuated-social-decision", "role": "prediction", "children": [ { "type": "Text", "value": "If the automatic perceptual self-prioritisation and the deliberate social-identity decoding stages compete for the same finite attentional resource, then requiring an explicit social decision (whose shape flickered first?) should attenuate, eliminate, or even reverse the self-advantage observed in the perceptual decision condition. The reversal direction is non-trivial — naive accounts of self-prioritisation predict that explicit attention to identity should amplify, not diminish, the self-advantage. The prediction here is the opposite: when participants must allocate resources to the social-decoding stage, the upstream perceptual self-prioritisation cannot proceed unimpeded, and the net measured advantage shrinks toward zero or flips toward an other-associated advantage." } ], "panel": [ "prediction" ], "relations": [ { "xref": "hypothesis-self-association-alters-attentional-selection", "relationType": "cito:citesAsSourceDocument" } ], "metadata": { "uuid": "6d9a04f9-966e-406b-9dac-19bd7342c50d", "concepts": [ "prediction", "social decision", "attentional trade-off", "resource competition", "decisional dimension" ], "displayClaim": "Requiring an explicit social-identity decision should attenuate, eliminate, or reverse the self-advantage seen in the perceptual decision condition — counter to the naive prediction that explicit attention to identity should amplify it." } }, { "type": "Claim", "identifier": "prediction-self-advantage-perceptual-decision", "role": "prediction", "children": [ { "type": "Text", "value": "If self-association alters early attentional selection automatically, then in a temporal order judgement task that requires only a perceptual report (which shape flickered first?) the self-associated stimulus should show a faster TVA processing rate than the other-associated stimulus, even though the social identity of either shape is irrelevant to the response. The advantage should manifest as a positive shift in (v_self − v_other) relative to the neutral baseline condition and should be present despite participants having no task incentive to attend to social identity." } ], "panel": [ "prediction" ], "relations": [ { "xref": "hypothesis-self-association-alters-attentional-selection", "relationType": "cito:citesAsSourceDocument" } ], "metadata": { "uuid": "93602413-67f5-47c9-8237-2f94fd6e763f", "concepts": [ "prediction", "perceptual decision", "automatic processing", "TVA processing rates", "temporal order judgement" ], "displayClaim": "In the perceptual-decision TOJ condition, the self-associated stimulus should show a faster TVA processing rate than the other-associated stimulus — even though social identity is irrelevant to the task." } }, { "type": "Claim", "identifier": "processing-capacity-rises-perceptual-self", "role": "empirical", "children": [ { "type": "Text", "value": "Processing capacity increases by 2.6 Hz [HDI95: -1.7 to 6.8 Hz] in the perceptual decision condition, with the self-associated stimulus showing a rate increase of 2.1 Hz [HDI95: 0.13 to 4.1 Hz]; the other-associated stimulus shows no consistent increase (0.53 Hz [HDI95: -1.4 to 2.5 Hz]), confirming the model selection favoring condition-specific capacity parameters." } ], "epistemicStrength": "moderate", "relations": [ { "xref": "hypothesis-capacity-mechanism-not-weights", "relationType": "cito:confirms" }, { "xref": "tva-capacity-model-wins", "relationType": "claimrel:requires" }, { "xref": "self-prioritization-perceptual-decision-automatic", "relationType": "cito:supports" } ], "metadata": { "uuid": "e74f5a44-4883-4e68-a9b5-147e0273b2fb", "concepts": [ "processing capacity", "TVA C parameter", "self-associated stimulus", "absolute processing rates" ] } }, { "type": "Claim", "identifier": "scope-toj-tva-paradigm", "role": "scope", "children": [ { "type": "Text", "value": "All claims about self-prioritisation processing rates derive from a specific paradigm envelope: a temporal order judgement task with arbitrarily assigned shape-self/other associations (taught via a preceding shape-label matching task), analysed under a hierarchical Bayesian Theory of Visual Attention model. The empirical sample is N=69 in Experiment 1 (perceptual vs social decision dimension) and N=71 in Experiment 2 (social × perceptual salience factorial), both preregistered (https://osf.io/ehu75) and recruited online with standard attention and exclusion checks. The framework treats processing rate as the sum of capacity C and relative weights w; the per-claim verification path uses pre-computed Stan posterior summaries deposited at https://osf.io/a62df. Generalisation beyond arbitrary self-associations (e.g. to faces, names, or pre-existing identities), beyond TOJ (e.g. to RT-only paradigms), or beyond TVA-based estimation is not established by this paper." } ], "panel": [ "scope" ], "epistemicStrength": "strong", "relations": [ { "xref": "tva-capacity-model-wins", "relationType": "claimrel:scopes" }, { "xref": "self-prioritization-perceptual-decision-automatic", "relationType": "claimrel:scopes" }, { "xref": "self-prioritization-absent-social-decision", "relationType": "claimrel:scopes" }, { "xref": "processing-capacity-rises-perceptual-self", "relationType": "claimrel:scopes" }, { "xref": "decisional-dimension-tradeoff", "relationType": "claimrel:scopes" }, { "xref": "spe-matching-correlates-social-decision", "relationType": "claimrel:scopes" }, { "xref": "other-association-advantage-social-condition", "relationType": "claimrel:scopes" }, { "xref": "perceptual-salience-6hz-advantage", "relationType": "claimrel:scopes" }, { "xref": "self-social-additive-perceptual", "relationType": "claimrel:scopes" }, { "xref": "self-salience-reduces-perceptual-benefit", "relationType": "claimrel:scopes" }, { "xref": "self-salience-dominates-other-associated", "relationType": "claimrel:scopes" }, { "xref": "spe-robust-matching-both-experiments", "relationType": "claimrel:scopes" }, { "xref": "self-prioritization-automatic-early", "relationType": "claimrel:scopes" }, { "xref": "social-perceptual-salience-independent-streams", "relationType": "claimrel:scopes" } ], "metadata": { "uuid": "121d0b37-99b6-459e-8093-bce99c94b708", "concepts": [ "paradigm scope", "temporal order judgement", "hierarchical Bayesian TVA", "sample", "preregistration" ], "displayClaim": "All processing-rate claims derive from a TOJ + shape-label matching + hierarchical Bayesian TVA paradigm; preregistered N=69 (Exp 1) and N=71 (Exp 2); arbitrary shape-self associations only; OSF-deposited posteriors." } }, { "type": "Claim", "identifier": "self-prioritization-absent-social-decision", "role": "empirical", "children": [ { "type": "Text", "value": "In the social decision dimension (report whose shape flickered first), there is no processing advantage for self-associated stimuli: the relative advantage is 0.87 Hz [HDI95: −0.96 to 2.7 Hz], with 63.9% of the HDI favoring the other-associated stimulus (1.2 Hz [HDI95: −0.78 to 3.1 Hz])." } ], "epistemicStrength": "moderate", "relations": [ { "xref": "self-prioritization-perceptual-decision-automatic", "relationType": "cito:disagreesWith" }, { "xref": "prediction-self-advantage-attenuated-social-decision", "relationType": "claimrel:tests" }, { "xref": "hypothesis-self-association-alters-attentional-selection", "relationType": "cito:confirms" }, { "xref": "tva-capacity-model-wins", "relationType": "claimrel:requires" }, { "xref": "self-prioritization-automatic-early", "relationType": "cito:supports" }, { "xref": "decisional-dimension-tradeoff", "relationType": "cito:supports" } ], "metadata": { "uuid": "2189823e-209f-479b-a068-032f5fba3818", "concepts": [ "self-prioritization", "social decision", "other-prioritization", "attentional selection", "TVA processing rates" ] } }, { "type": "Claim", "identifier": "self-prioritization-automatic-early", "role": "interpretation", "children": [ { "type": "Text", "value": "Self-association enhances attentional selection automatically at the perceptual feature level — it emerges without explicit social decoding (perceptual decision condition, Experiment 1) and is reduced or reversed when social identity decoding is required (social decision condition, Experiments 1 and 2), indicating that self-prioritization in attentional selection is an early, pre-conscious process distinct from later social cognition." } ], "epistemicStrength": "moderate", "relations": [ { "xref": "self-prioritization-perceptual-decision-automatic", "relationType": "claimrel:interprets" }, { "xref": "self-prioritization-absent-social-decision", "relationType": "claimrel:interprets" }, { "xref": "other-association-advantage-social-condition", "relationType": "claimrel:interprets" }, { "xref": "hypothesis-self-association-alters-attentional-selection", "relationType": "cito:confirms" }, { "xref": "self-prioritization-perceptual-decision-automatic", "relationType": "claimrel:requires" }, { "xref": "self-prioritization-absent-social-decision", "relationType": "claimrel:requires" }, { "xref": "other-association-advantage-social-condition", "relationType": "claimrel:requires" } ], "metadata": { "uuid": "74cdf20e-9cfb-42ae-88cc-956527bc4af7", "concepts": [ "self-prioritization", "automatic processing", "early attentional selection", "perceptual feature level", "social cognition" ], "shortClaim": "Self-prioritization operates at the early perceptual stage, before social decoding." } }, { "type": "Claim", "identifier": "self-prioritization-perceptual-decision-automatic", "role": "empirical", "children": [ { "type": "Text", "value": "In the perceptual decision dimension (report which shape flickered first), self-associated stimuli were processed 1.5 Hz faster than other-associated stimuli [HDI95: −0.16 to 3.2 Hz], driven by a capacity increase of 2.6 Hz and a self-associated rate increase of 2.1 Hz [HDI95: 0.13 to 4.1 Hz]; other-associated stimulus rate showed no consistent increase (0.53 Hz [HDI95: −1.4 to 2.5 Hz])." } ], "epistemicStrength": "moderate", "relations": [ { "xref": "prediction-self-advantage-perceptual-decision", "relationType": "claimrel:tests" }, { "xref": "hypothesis-self-association-alters-attentional-selection", "relationType": "cito:confirms" }, { "xref": "tva-capacity-model-wins", "relationType": "claimrel:requires" }, { "xref": "self-prioritization-automatic-early", "relationType": "cito:supports" } ], "metadata": { "uuid": "0b72064e-d0fc-43e9-a2d0-2d5044cde51e", "concepts": [ "self-prioritization", "attentional selection", "automatic processing", "perceptual decision", "TVA processing rates" ] } }, { "type": "Claim", "identifier": "self-salience-dominates-other-associated", "role": "synthesis", "children": [ { "type": "Text", "value": "For perceptually salient self-associated stimuli, social salience effects are the stronger predictor (BFinclusion = 2458.52) while perceptual salience also contributes; for perceptually salient other-associated stimuli, perceptual salience dominates (BFinclusion = 4638.74), with social salience having a weaker role." } ], "epistemicStrength": "moderate", "relations": [ { "xref": "self-salience-reduces-perceptual-benefit", "relationType": "claimrel:interprets" }, { "xref": "self-social-additive-perceptual", "relationType": "claimrel:interprets" }, { "xref": "self-salience-reduces-perceptual-benefit", "relationType": "claimrel:requires" } ], "metadata": { "uuid": "fcc24782-2506-4c9e-908a-baa03bb791fb", "concepts": [ "Bayesian model selection", "self vs other association", "salience dominance", "individual differences", "attentional prediction" ], "shortClaim": "Social salience dominates for self-associated stimuli — perceptual salience dominates for other." } }, { "type": "Claim", "identifier": "self-salience-reduces-perceptual-benefit", "role": "empirical", "children": [ { "type": "Text", "value": "Perceptual salience benefit is substantially reduced for self-associated stimuli (2.5 Hz [HDI95: 0.86 to 4.1 Hz]) compared to other-associated (5.2 Hz [HDI95: 3.6 to 6.9 Hz]) or non-socially-associated perceptually salient stimuli (6 Hz [HDI95: 4.6 to 7.3 Hz]), indicating a sub-additive interaction when social self-relevance and perceptual salience co-occur." } ], "epistemicStrength": "moderate", "relations": [ { "xref": "self-social-additive-perceptual", "relationType": "cito:disagreesWith" }, { "xref": "perceptual-salience-6hz-advantage", "relationType": "claimrel:requires" }, { "xref": "self-salience-dominates-other-associated", "relationType": "cito:supports" } ], "metadata": { "uuid": "d5cc37f8-3738-4acf-95de-3c10a177aa69", "concepts": [ "sub-additive interaction", "self-salience", "perceptual salience", "attentional competition", "obligatory self-prioritization" ] } }, { "type": "Claim", "identifier": "self-social-additive-perceptual", "role": "empirical", "children": [ { "type": "Text", "value": "The combination of social association and perceptual salience for other-associated stimuli produces effects consistent with additivity: the interaction term for other-associated salient stimuli is -0.54 Hz [HDI95: -2.4 to 1.4 Hz], indistinguishable from zero, indicating that social and perceptual salience operate via independent mechanisms for other-associated stimuli." } ], "epistemicStrength": "moderate", "relations": [ { "xref": "self-salience-reduces-perceptual-benefit", "relationType": "cito:disagreesWith" }, { "xref": "prediction-additive-effects-other-associated", "relationType": "claimrel:tests" }, { "xref": "hypothesis-social-perceptual-independent-mechanisms", "relationType": "cito:confirms" }, { "xref": "social-perceptual-salience-independent-streams", "relationType": "cito:supports" } ], "metadata": { "uuid": "b32daec4-44c8-409c-8c3c-e7a1d13eb526", "concepts": [ "additivity", "social salience", "perceptual salience", "independent mechanisms", "interaction" ] } }, { "type": "Claim", "identifier": "social-perceptual-salience-independent-streams", "role": "interpretation", "children": [ { "type": "Text", "value": "Social salience and perceptual salience operate via largely independent mechanisms in attentional selection: their effects are additive for other-associated stimuli (interaction term -0.54 Hz, HDI includes zero), confirming that arbitrary social association and physical salience capture attention through separate processing streams rather than a single shared resource." } ], "epistemicStrength": "moderate", "relations": [ { "xref": "self-social-additive-perceptual", "relationType": "claimrel:interprets" }, { "xref": "self-salience-reduces-perceptual-benefit", "relationType": "claimrel:interprets" }, { "xref": "perceptual-salience-6hz-advantage", "relationType": "claimrel:interprets" }, { "xref": "hypothesis-social-perceptual-independent-mechanisms", "relationType": "cito:confirms" }, { "xref": "self-social-additive-perceptual", "relationType": "claimrel:requires" }, { "xref": "perceptual-salience-6hz-advantage", "relationType": "claimrel:requires" } ], "metadata": { "uuid": "63ea3299-4288-46d1-b563-784d69f364cf", "concepts": [ "social salience", "perceptual salience", "independent mechanisms", "attentional processing streams", "additivity" ], "shortClaim": "Social and perceptual salience add independently in attentional selection." } }, { "type": "Claim", "identifier": "spe-matching-correlates-social-decision", "role": "empirical", "children": [ { "type": "Text", "value": "Individual self-prioritization effects in the shape-label matching task correlate with socially induced processing rate changes in the social decision dimension in Experiment 1 (r = 0.354, BF10 = 8.23, 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.54) but not in the perceptual decision dimension (r = 0.069, BF10 = 0.181)." } ], "epistemicStrength": "moderate", "relations": [ { "xref": "self-prioritization-absent-social-decision", "relationType": "cito:confirms" }, { "xref": "spe-robust-matching-both-experiments", "relationType": "claimrel:requires" }, { "xref": "self-prioritization-absent-social-decision", "relationType": "claimrel:requires" } ], "metadata": { "uuid": "7a683a00-fc93-4d25-ae38-48734f0a8789", "concepts": [ "SPE matching task", "individual differences", "processing rate correlation", "social decision dimension", "self-prioritization effect" ] } }, { "type": "Claim", "identifier": "spe-robust-matching-both-experiments", "role": "control", "children": [ { "type": "Text", "value": "Strong self-prioritization effects are present in the shape-label matching task in both experiments: Experiment 1 (N=69) d = -1.064 [CI95: -1.38 to -0.75], BF10 = 3.23×10^95; Experiment 2 (N=71) d = -0.982 [CI95: -1.20 to -0.77], BF10 = 4.47×10^109, confirming participants learned and retained the self-associations used in the TOJ task." } ], "epistemicStrength": "strong", "relations": [ { "xref": "self-prioritization-perceptual-decision-automatic", "relationType": "cito:confirms" }, { "xref": "self-prioritization-absent-social-decision", "relationType": "cito:confirms" }, { "xref": "other-association-advantage-social-condition", "relationType": "cito:confirms" }, { "xref": "spe-matching-correlates-social-decision", "relationType": "cito:supports" } ], "metadata": { "uuid": "0eef258f-1e89-4298-a762-c0c4a877ab9a", "concepts": [ "self-prioritization effect", "shape-label matching", "manipulation check", "Cohen's d", "Bayes factor" ] } }, { "type": "Claim", "identifier": "tva-capacity-model-wins", "role": "methodological", "children": [ { "type": "Text", "value": "Model comparison via leave-one-out cross-validation shows that a model with condition-specific processing capacity parameters outperforms a single-capacity model (Δloo=14.2, Δse=6.41, weight=0.86 pooled across N=140 participants), indicating that social salience changes absolute processing rates rather than merely redistributing attentional weights." } ], "epistemicStrength": "strong", "relations": [ { "xref": "self-prioritization-perceptual-decision-automatic", "relationType": "cito:usesMethodIn" }, { "xref": "self-prioritization-absent-social-decision", "relationType": "cito:usesMethodIn" }, { "xref": "processing-capacity-rises-perceptual-self", "relationType": "cito:usesMethodIn" }, { "xref": "other-association-advantage-social-condition", "relationType": "cito:usesMethodIn" }, { "xref": "perceptual-salience-6hz-advantage", "relationType": "cito:usesMethodIn" }, { "xref": "self-social-additive-perceptual", "relationType": "cito:usesMethodIn" }, { "xref": "self-salience-reduces-perceptual-benefit", "relationType": "cito:usesMethodIn" }, { "xref": "prediction-capacity-model-outperforms-weights-only", "relationType": "claimrel:tests" }, { "xref": "interprets-bundesen-tva-framework", "relationType": "claimrel:interprets" }, { "xref": "hypothesis-capacity-mechanism-not-weights", "relationType": "cito:confirms" } ], "metadata": { "uuid": "24c24fef-2404-41a6-a0ea-edfe81cd3707", "concepts": [ "TVA model comparison", "processing capacity", "model selection", "leave-one-out cross-validation" ] } } ] } ], "title": [ { "type": "Text", "value": "Self-association enhances early attentional selection through automatic prioritization of socially salient signals" } ] }