对支撑注意力的区域的损害会导致半空间忽视,其特征是对反面空间中呈现的刺激注意力不集中。动机突出的刺激(例如奖励/威胁)是,然而,与中性刺激相比,容易被忽视,更容易被发现。突出的注意力理论表明,忽视的动机检测优势是由目标独立的“情感注意力”系统支撑的。然而,以前使用的刺激意识度量通常将刺激作为与目标相关的目标集的一部分。因此,以前的发现可能与自上而下的注意力选择更一致,在某些情况下被忽略。使用多层次和贝叶斯元分析方法对个案和群体数据进行分析,忽视动机检测优势的证据,以及它出现时的条件,进行了审查,并审查了概念性索赔。累积证据表明,在感知简单的条件下,当一个刺激出现时,没有动机检测优势的证据(个体:k=36;logOR=.02,95CI[-.44,.47];组:k=2,dz=.24,95CI[-.26,.74])。相反,在感知要求更高的条件下,有多个目标相关的刺激,在空间的对比侧检测到的动机显著刺激多于中性刺激(个体:k=37,logOR=1.04,95CI[.74,1.34];组:k=7,dz=.81,95CI[.27,1.35])。在整个调查中,当动机突出的刺激是目标时,检测优势就发生了,并且在知觉要求苛刻的条件下,通常抑制与目标无关的动机突出刺激。因此,目前的证据并不强烈支持独立于目标的机制,自上而下的账户仍然是合理的。这个账户可以在现有的忽视模型中进行情境化,因此,当优先考虑同义空间时,感知负荷会引起对相对空间的抑制。目标刺激可能,然而,由于它们的目标相关性,仍然在感知能力降低的情况下被检测到,可以通过动机显著性选择性地增强。
Damage to regions underpinning attention can result in hemi-spatial neglect, characterised by inattention to stimuli presented in contralesional space. Motivationally salient stimuli (e.g. reward/threat) are, however, resilient to neglect and more likely to be detected compared to neutral stimuli. Prominent theories of attention suggest that the motivational detection advantage in neglect is underpinned by a goal-independent \'emotional attention\' system. However, measures of stimulus awareness previously used often present the stimuli as part of the goal-relevant target set. Previous findings may therefore be more consistent with top-down attentional selection, which is preserved in some cases of neglect. Using multilevel and Bayesian meta-analytic approaches to individual case and group data, the evidence for a motivational detection advantage in neglect, and conditions when it emerges, were examined and conceptual claims reviewed. Cumulative evidence suggested that in perceptually simple conditions, when a single stimulus appeared, there was no evidence of a motivational detection advantage (Individual: k = 36; log OR = .02, 95%CI [-.44,.47]; Group: k = 2, dz = .24, 95%CI [-.26, .74]). Conversely, under more perceptually demanding conditions, with multiple goal-relevant stimuli, motivationally salient stimuli were detected more than neutral stimuli in the contralesion side of space (Individual: k = 37, log OR = 1.04, 95%CI [.74, 1.34]; Group: k = 7, dz = .81, 95%CI [.27, 1.35]). Across investigations the detection advantage occurred when the motivationally salient stimulus was a target, and under perceptually demanding conditions when goal-irrelevant motivationally salient stimuli are usually suppressed. The current evidence therefore does not strongly support a goal-independent mechanism, and a top-down account remains plausible. This account can be contextualised within existing models of neglect, whereby perceptual load induces suppression of contralesional space when ipsilesional space is prioritised. Target stimuli may, however, still be detected under reduced perceptual capacity due to their goal-relevance, which may be selectively enhanced by motivational salience.