Self-relevance enhances evidence gathering during decision-making
Introduction
Self-relevant stimuli occupy a position of prominence during social-cognitive functioning. Compared to material associated with other people, items coupled with the self are easier to detect, classify, and recall (e.g., Alexopoulos et al., 2012; Bargh & Pratto, 1986; Keyes & Brady, 2010; Kuiper & Rogers, 1979; Shapiro et al., 1997; Symons & Johnson, 1997). These effects, moreover, extend beyond traditional stimulus materials (e.g., faces, names), emerging also for geometric shapes, abstract symbols, and colors/sounds that have been linked with the self (e.g., Schäfer et al., 2015, Schäfer et al., 2016; Sui et al., 2012; Wang et al., 2016; Woźniak & Knoblich, 2019; Yin et al., 2019). Underpinning self-prioritization, it has been argued, is a mind that is preferentially tuned to personally meaningful information, such that self-relevance triggers the enhanced processing of sensory inputs (Humphreys & Sui, 2016; Sui and Humphreys, 2015, Sui and Humphreys, 2017; Sui & Rotshtein, 2019). But is this actually the case? Using an object-ownership task, we explored this issue in the current investigation.
Despite repeated assertions that self-relevant items are privileged during stimulus processing, evidence supporting this viewpoint is scant and garnered primarily (and indirectly) from shape-label matching tasks (e.g., Macrae et al., 2018; Sui et al., 2012, Sui et al., 2015). Indeed, across other paradigms, the beneficial effects of self-relevance have been noticeably absent. For example, in a rapid oculomotor search task, Siebold et al. (2015) reported no facilitation in eye movements to lines previously associated with the self (see also Wade & Vickery, 2018). Similarly, using breaking continuous flash suppression (b-CFS) to investigate the ease with which items (i.e., Gabors) access visual awareness during a stimulus-localization task, Stein et al. (2016) observed no effect of self-relevance on the time taken for Gabors to overcome interocular suppression (cf. Macrae et al., 2017). Together with related research, these findings contest the perceptual basis of self-prioritization, suggesting instead that task performance is underpinned by a response bias (Constable, Welsh, et al., 2019). Specifically, rather than enhancing the efficiency of stimulus processing, self-relevance triggers a preference for self-relevant (vs. other-relevant) responses.
A similar response-based account of self-prioritization has emerged from closely related research exploring the effects of ownership on object processing. As psychological extensions of the self — even when acquired unintentionally and without value — people's possessions loom large during stimulus appraisal (Pierce et al., 2003). Accordingly, it has been suggested that ownership (vs. perceptual-matching tasks) comprises an ecologically appropriate task context for investigating the effects of self-relevance on thinking and doing (e.g., Constable et al., 2011, Constable et al., 2014; Cunningham et al., 2008; Falbén et al., 2019; Golubickis et al., 2018; Truong et al., 2017; Turk et al., 2011). In perceptual-matching tasks, abstract stimuli serve as proxies for various individuals (e.g., self is a triangle, friend is a square), a methodologically expedient although somewhat artificial strategy for forming target-stimulus mappings (Sui et al., 2012). In object-ownership tasks, in contrast, associations are forged between persons and their possessions, an entirely naturalistic and commonplace aspect of daily life (Constable, Welsh, et al., 2019; Cunningham et al., 2008). As such, ownership has served as a valuable vehicle for exploring the dynamics of self-referential processing. Crucially however, whether items serve as self-proxies or self-associates, prioritization effects (i.e., self-prioritization effect, self-ownership effect) can be interpreted within Humphreys and Sui's (2016) Self-Attention Network (SAN) model, whereby self-relevance facilitates the processing of personally meaningful inputs through the interplay of top-down (i.e., self activation) and bottom-up (i.e., attentional orienting) processes.
In work investigating the effects of ownership on stimulus processing, a consistent pattern of effects has emerged. Compared to other people's belongings, personal possession confers significant advantages during object detection and classification (i.e., self-ownership effect). Constable, Welsh, et al. (2019), for example, demonstrated that when judging which of two objects initially appeared on the computer screen (i.e., temporal-order-judgment task) — a mug owned-by-self or a mug owned-by-the-experimenter — participants were biased toward reporting that self-owned items appeared first (i.e., prior-entry effect). This effect was eliminated, however, when the requested judgment probed a stimulus-related dimension unrelated to ownership (e.g., did the mug appear to the left or right of fixation?), thereby implying that a criterion shift during response preparation (and not stimulus enhancement) underpinned self-prioritization (i.e., participants were biased toward reporting that self-owned objects appeared first; for a competing viewpoint, see Truong et al., 2017).
Related research by Golubickis et al., 2018, Golubickis et al., 2019 has also furnished a response-based account of the self-ownership effect. In a series of experiments, participants were presented with objects (i.e., pencils & pens) that ostensibly belonged either to the self or a best friend (or mother) and their task was simply to classify the items (i.e., owned-by-self vs. owned-by-friend) as quickly and accurately as possible. The results yielded a self-ownership effect, indicating response facilitation for self-owned (vs. friend-owned) objects. Furthermore, using a drift diffusion model analysis to interrogate the processes underpinning task performance (i.e., stimulus and/or response biases; Ratcliff et al., 2016; Voss et al., 2013; White & Poldrack, 2014), this effect was traced to the operation of a response bias (i.e., variability in the evidential requirements of response generation). Specifically, less information was needed to generate owned-by-self compared to owned-by-friend responses. Crucially, no difference in the efficiency of stimulus processing (i.e., rate of information uptake - stimulus bias) was observed as a function of ownership,1 thereby demonstrating that self-relevance expedites performance through its influence on response-related operations (Constable, Welsh, et al., 2019; Miyakoshi et al., 2007; Siebold et al., 2015; Stein et al., 2016; Wade & Vickery, 2018).
Again using drift diffusion modeling, several recent studies have confirmed that the self-ownership effect resides in the operation of a response bias (e.g., Falbén et al., in press; Golubickis et al., 2019, Golubickis et al., n.d). For example, Golubickis et al. (2019) showed that both European and Asian participants were biased to expect items (i.e., pencils & pens) that were owned-by-self compared to owned-by-mother during an object-classification task. Similarly, using an identical task, Falbén et al. (in press) manipulated the likelihood with which to-be-judged self-owned and friend-owned items were presented. The results revealed that, regardless of ownership, responses were facilitated toward the most frequent items, an effect that was underpinned by differences in the evidential requirements of response generation (i.e., response bias). Interestingly, although stimulus biases have also emerged in these studies (e.g., Golubickis et al., 2019, Expt. 2), these effects are occasional and can go in the wrong direction (e.g., friend > self, Falbén et al., in press, Expt. 1). Thus, in object-ownership tasks, stimulus prioritization is characteristically driven by a response bias.2
Based on the existing literature, both the extent of self-ownership effects and whether they originate exclusively in differences in the evidential requirements of response generation are issues that merit additional scrutiny. In the task adopted by Golubickis et al., 2018, Golubickis et al., 2019 — consistent with prior work on self-prioritization (Sui et al., 2012) — to-be-judged items were presented under non-challenging processing conditions (e.g., 100 ms stimulus duration). It remains to be seen, therefore, whether a comparable self-ownership effect would emerge when stimuli are encountered under more taxing circumstances. For example, can the self-relevance (or otherwise) of items be established from stimuli that are presented very briefly? Given the contention that self-prioritization is a pivotal component of social cognition, one would expect this to be the case (Humphreys & Sui, 2016; Sui and Humphreys, 2015, Sui and Humphreys, 2017; Sui & Rotshtein, 2019). That is, information-processing benefits would be most pronounced if self-relevance were extracted successfully from even fleetingly encountered stimuli.
In addition, under conditions of rapid stimulus presentation, it is possible that prioritization may originate in the operation of a stimulus bias. In object-ownership tasks, much like any other decisional context, performance is driven by a combination of stimulus and response-related processes, with each influenced by particular aspects of the experimental paradigm under consideration (White & Poldrack, 2014). Whereas response biases are modulated by factors such as item probability and reward, stimulus biases are sensitive to variation in the quality of sensory inputs (De Loof et al., 2016; Leite & Ratcliff, 2011; Mulder et al., 2012; Ratcliff, 2014; Voss et al., 2004). This suggests that, in a challenging task context, ownership may facilitate object classification via a stimulus bias — specifically, differences in the rate at which decisional evidence is accumulated from self-relevant (vs. friend-relevant) objects. Through the rapid presentation and backward masking of self-owned and friend-owned objects, we examined this hypothesis in the current experiment. To explore the processes underpinning task performance, data were submitted to a drift diffusion model analysis.
Section snippets
Participants and design
Thirty-six undergraduates (14 male, Mage = 19.54, SD = 2.22) took part in the research.3 One male participant failed to follow the instructions by responding with invalid key presses, thus was excluded from the analyses. All participants had normal or corrected-to-normal visual acuity. Informed consent was obtained prior to the commencement of the experiment and the protocol was
Discussion
The benefits of self-relevance on information processing have been observed across a range of stimuli, tasks, and sensory modalities (Humphreys & Sui, 2016; Schäfer et al., 2016; Sui & Humphreys, 2015; Sui & Rotshtein, 2019). Notwithstanding multiple demonstrations of self-prioritization, however, the scope and origin of this effect remains a matter of debate. Whilst early work asserted that self-relevance facilitates performance via enhanced stimulus processing (Sui et al., 2012, Sui et al.,
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Johanna K. Falbén:Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Formal analysis, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing.Marius Golubickis:Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Formal analysis, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing.Skomantas Tamulaitis:Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Investigation.Siobhan Caughey:Conceptualization, Methodology.Dimitra Tsamadi:Conceptualization, Methodology, Software.Linn M. Persson:Conceptualization, Methodology.Saga L.
References (70)
- et al.
Individual construct accessibility and perceptual selection
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
(1986) - et al.
Grasping the concept of personal property
Cognition
(2011) - et al.
Yours or mine? Ownership and memory
Consciousness and Cognition
(2008) - et al.
Predictive information speeds up visual awareness in an individuation task by modulating threshold setting, not processing efficiency
Vision Research
(2016) - et al.
Prior probability and feature predictability interactively bias perceptual decisions
Neuropsychologia
(2014) - et al.
Parts of me: Identity-relevance moderates self-prioritization
Consciousness and Cognition
(2020) Event files: Feature binding in and across perception and action
Trends in Cognitive Sciences
(2004)- et al.
An ERP study on self-relevant object recognition
Brain and Cognition
(2007) - et al.
Diffusion decision model: Current issues and history
Trends in Cognitive Science
(2016) - et al.
The integrative self: How self-reference integrates perception and memory
Trends in Cognitive Sciences
(2015)
Self-prioritization and the attentional systems
Current Opinion in Psychology
When possessions become part of the self: Ownership and implicit self-object linking
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
I, me, mine: Automatic attentional capture by self-related stimuli
European Journal of Social Psychology
The self
The physics of optimal decision making: A formal analysis of models of performance in two-alternative forced-choice tasks
Psychological Review
Object ownership and action: The influence of social context and choice on the physical manipulation of personal property
Experimental Brain Research
It is not in the details: Self-related shapes are rapidly classified but their features are not better remembered
Memory & Cognition
I before U: Temporal order judgements reveal bias for self-owned objects
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
The construction of autobiographical memories in the self-memory system
Psychological Review
How prioritized is self-prioritization during stimulus processing?
Visual Cognition
Exploring the self-ownership effect: Separating stimulus and response biases
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition
Self-prioritization and perceptual matching: The effects of temporal construal
Memory & Cognition
Mine or mother's? Exploring the self-ownership effect across cultures
Culture and Brain
What the social brain sciences can tell us about the self
Current Directions in Psychological Science
Representing oneself and others: An event-coding approach
Experimental Psychology
Good me bad me: Prioritization of the good self during perceptual decision-making
Collabra: Psychology
Attentional control and the self: The self-attention network (SAN)
Cognitive Neuroscience
The central locus of self-prioritisation
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
Treating stimuli as a random factor in social psychology: A new and comprehensive solution to a pervasive but largely ignored problem
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Self-face recognition is characterized by “bilateral gain” and by faster, more accurate performance which persists when faces are inverted
The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
A Bayesian hierarchical diffusion model decomposition of performance in approach-avoidance tasks
Cognition and Emotion
Cited by (12)
Learning about me and you: Only deterministic stimulus associations elicit self-prioritization
2023, Consciousness and CognitionThe relevance of familiarity in the context of self-related information processing
2023, Quarterly Journal of Experimental PsychologyDoes an experimentally induced self-association elicit affective self-prioritisation?
2023, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology