↓ Skip to main content

A new perspective on human reward research: How consciously and unconsciously perceived reward information influences performance

Overview of attention for article published in Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
183 Mendeley
Title
A new perspective on human reward research: How consciously and unconsciously perceived reward information influences performance
Published in
Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, January 2014
DOI 10.3758/s13415-013-0241-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Claire M. Zedelius, Harm Veling, Ruud Custers, Erik Bijleveld, Kimberly S. Chiew, Henk Aarts

Abstract

The question of how human performance can be improved through rewards is a recurrent topic of interest in psychology and neuroscience. Traditional, cognitive approaches to this topic have focused solely on consciously communicated rewards. Recently, a largely neuroscience-inspired perspective has emerged to examine the potential role of conscious awareness of reward information in effective reward pursuit. The present article reviews research employing a newly developed monetary-reward-priming paradigm that allows for a systematic investigation of this perspective. We analyze this research to identify similarities and differences in how consciously and unconsciously perceived rewards impact three distinct aspects relevant to performance: decision making, task preparation, and task execution. We further discuss whether conscious awareness, in modulating the effects of reward information, plays a role similar to its role in modulating the effects of other affective information. Implications of these insights for understanding the role of consciousness in modulating goal-directed behavior more generally are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 183 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
United Kingdom 2 1%
Japan 1 <1%
Unknown 178 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 44 24%
Student > Master 31 17%
Researcher 30 16%
Student > Bachelor 15 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 7%
Other 28 15%
Unknown 23 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 95 52%
Neuroscience 14 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 8 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 2%
Other 14 8%
Unknown 41 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 April 2015.
All research outputs
#15,115,997
of 24,003,070 outputs
Outputs from Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
#547
of 974 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,679
of 312,905 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
#15
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,003,070 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 974 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,905 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.