The document discusses research on self-bias effects in cognitive perception, demonstrating that individuals show a significant bias towards self-relevant information across various tasks, which is influenced by specific neural circuits. It explores the distinction between self-bias, reward, and emotion biases, suggesting that they are not merely interchangeable but interact in complex ways. The findings indicate that self-association can enhance perception and memory, proposing techniques to utilize self-bias for cognitive improvement.

1. The biased self
Glyn Humphreys
Department of Experimental Psychology

2. Id, superego & ego: ego a form of moderation
between desires and social context, to serve
the purpose of the individual
Physical, mental, spiritual aspects of the self
Physical aspects could be transferred to
objects associated with the self

3. These different aspects of the self have been difficult to
study without relying on subjective opinion
Different – more indirect - approach
Study the way the self biases judgements which can
be measured objectively
Then to study what characterises self biases in judgements

4. Self bias effects
 There is considerable work showing that humans
show a bias towards information related to
themselves
 Memory (Conway et al., 1996)
 Trait evaluation (Klein et al., 1989)
 Face recognition (Keenan et al., 1999)

7.  However it is unclear what factors drive these effects
(what aspects of the self are important? visual
familiarity?)
 It is unclear what type of process may be affected
(enhanced perception?)
 The relations between the effects and basic
underlying processes (e.g., reward, emotion) remain
unexplored.

8.  We have tried to examine these issues using new
simple procedures developed to assess the
associative learning of self bias
 Procedures can be used for various associations
other than the self [reward, emotion]
 Procedures can be used to look at exactly what
processes are changed by being associated with the
self
 Work aims to tell us
– what characterises the self in self bias effects?
- what processes are affected?
- how does this relate to factors such as reward
and emotion?

9.  Here I will introduce the self-association procedure to
show that self-bias effects are robust and stable
across individuals
 Effects depend on a specific neural circuit
 Effects reflect the self as a form of ‘glue’ for
integrating information
 Effects can be distinguished from biases reflecting
reward and emotion – though influenced by both
 Self-biases reflect the ‘self’ as a hub through which
we integrate incoming information

10. Part 1: The self-association effect

11. You Friend Stranger

12. You

13. Stranger

14. You

15. Friend

16. Stranger

17. Stranger

18.  Is there a difference in matching the different shape-
label combinations (Sui, He & Humphreys, 2012, JEP:HPP)?

20. Massive self-advantage Gained within 15 learning trials

21. Self-bias in individuals – trait-like measure
Stability: test - retest
Individuals who show a strong self bias do so
across different occasions
Self-bias – even in such simple tasks – is a personal
characteristic
Linked to how individualistic the person is on
questionnaire measures

22. Part 2: Brain mechanisms of the effects
 Participants performed the self-association match
task in the scanner
 How do brain states change to generate the effect
(Sui, Rotshtein & Humphreys, 2013, PNAS)?

23. vmPFC classically associated
with self processing
LpSTS linked to the ventral
attentional network
Linking of self to socially
salient signal
Strength of connections
related to the strength of the
self advantage

24. Activity in the classic
dorsal attention control
network
Consistent with attention
needed for the more
difficult task

25. Opposite roles
in two neural
networks
Self tagging - a neural circuit of
vmPFC  LpSTS
Self tagging - a neural circuit of
vmPFC  LpSTS
Other-tagging - the frontal-parietal
control network
Other-tagging - the frontal-parietal
control network
Networks compete to determine behaviour

26. Part 3: The nature of self bias
1.The self as perceptual and memorial glue

27. A redundant trial
Redundancy gains occur when we have to
verify the presence of a target, performance is
enhanced when two targets are present relative
to when only a single target appears.
Redundancy gains occur when we have to
verify the presence of a target, performance is
enhanced when two targets are present relative
to when only a single target appears.
A trial with single item

28. A personal association task -
self vs. friend
A personal association task -
self vs. friend
Identical redundant
stimuli
A trial with single item
Same person
redundant stimuli
Sui & Humphreys, in press, APP
Sui, Yankouskaya, & Humphreys, in press,
JEPHPP

29. Self advantage
Formal analyses of these effects provide powerful
constraints on how they occur – e.g., whether there
is enhanced perceptual integration.
Formal analyses of these effects provide powerful
constraints on how they occur – e.g., whether there
is enhanced perceptual integration.

30. 1 = no capacity limits <1 limited capacity
>1 = super capacity
The self has super-capacity ‘super glue’

31. January 19, 2015Presentation title, edit in
header and footer
(view menu)
Page 31
Col & shape
Oxford
Cambridge

32. The self as ‘glue’ for memory
YOU FRIEND
1. Match to the label
2. Recall all items
What happens to the items from the relevant categories?
What happens to the irrelevant items?

33. Self advantage for relevant and irrelevant items
Self association as glue

34. Self bias is linked to greater integration of
stimuli in perception and in memory
The self as perceptual and memorial glue
Are these effects related to reward or emotion?

35. Part 4: Self-, reward-, and emotion-biases
£8£0.5
YouFriend

36. Self-, reward-, and emotion-biases
Effect of brain lesionEffect of brain lesion
Are these the same
phenomenon?
Self as high reward or
positive emotion?

37. January 19, 2015Presentation title, edit in
header and footer
(view menu)
Page 37
Damage to left circuit – change the self advantage
Damage to right circuit – reduce attentional control &
increase the self advantage
What happens to the effects of emotion and reward?

38. The left frontal lesion
associated with three
types of hyper-biases
Frontal lesion of the executive control
network

39. The left temporal-
parietal lesion
associated with hyper-
self-bias only
Lesion of self attention area

40. The left insula and
vmPFC lesion associated
with hypo-self and
hyper-emotion
Lesion of self representation

41.  The neuropsychological data suggest that
self, reward and emotion biases are not the
same phenomenon
 This conclusion also supported by results
where one factor is pitted against another
 Self to low reward, stranger to high reward
etc.

42. You
£1
Friend
£5
Stranger
£15
Self trumps reward
Reward beats friendship
Self bias effects not simply linked to
reward in any simple linear way

43. Conclusions:
Part 1: Self-bias occurs in simple association learning.
Self bias acts like an individual trait
Part 2: Self bias is supported by a neural network
independent of the attentional network
Part 3: Self bias is sensitive to a self-reference frame and
it reflects super-integration in perception and memory
Part 4: Self-bias is not driven just by reward or emotion valence

44. Conclusions:
Association with self-representation is a cognitive enhancer
in perception and memory
Harnessing self-bias effects may be an effective means
of improving memory and perception
Self bias may reflect a basic aspect of human cognition
and perception – to produce enhanced attention to self
relevant stimuli

46.  GA – patient who suffered herpes simplex encephalitis – severe
amnesia
We assessed if his amnesia could be reduced
by having him make personal associations with stimuli –
objects assigned as belonging to him or sister

47. 25% improvement from linking to the self

48. Overall points:
Techniques of this type may have provide a new means of
exploring perception in a social context
Self bias modulates even basic perceptual processing –
perception not isolated (Fodor, 1983)
Self bias may reflect a basic aspect of human cognition
and perception – to produce enhanced attention to self
relevant stimuli

49. Overall theoretical & methodological points:
Techniques of this type may have provide a new means of
exploring perception in a social context
Self bias modulates even basic perceptual processing –
perception not isolated (Fodor, 1983)
Self bias may reflect a basic aspect of human cognition
and perception – to produce enhanced attention to self
relevant stimuli

50. Thanks for your attention

51.  To what extent do these effects of the self
reflect more basic processes – such as the
self being linked to high reward (Northoff &
Hayes, 2011)
 Used the tagging paradigm with stimuli
varying in reward
£15 £5 £1

52. Effects of reward & contrast
Effects mimic those of self
association
If we pit self against reward?

53. You
£1
Friend
£5
Stranger
£15
Self trumps reward
Reward beats friendship
Technique easily extends
to the assessment of
other social biases

54. Conclusions:
After <15 learning trials, neutral shapes can be tagged
with social significance
This changes the perceptual salience of the stimulus
- self-associated shapes gain in perceptual salience
There is also a change in the neural response to tagged shapes
The self-bias effect does not seem ‘merely’ to reflect
differential familiarity or reward

55. Overall points:
Techniques of this type may have provide a new means of
exploring perception in a social context
Self bias modulates even basic perceptual processing –
perception not isolated (Fodor, 1983)
Self bias may reflect a basic aspect of human cognition
and perception – to produce enhanced attention to self
relevant stimuli

56. Self-, reward-, and emotion-biases
Effect of brain lesionEffect of brain lesion
Control data

57. Thanks for your attention

58. Part 2: Automaticity and brain circuits
 How automatic are these effects?
 Vary the probability with which the match pairs appear
(Sui et al., APP, 2014)
 Can you reduce self bias if the self only appears
rarely?
Self: Mother: Stranger 1: 3: 3
Self: Mother: Stranger 3: 1: 3
Self: Mother: Stranger 3: 3: 1

59. Performance plotted relative to when there were
equal probabilities of occurrence
Faster as probability varies
Slower as probability varies

60. What happens on low probability trials?
No cost for the self condition, costs on
performance for mother and stranger
conditions

61. What happens on high probability trials?
Mother & Stranger
Self & Mother
Self & Stranger
Only self gains

62.  On low probability trials substantial costs for low frequency
‘other’ stimuli (relative to same frequency baseline) – effects
of expectancy to high frequency
 Yet NO costs for self
 On high probability trials, benefits for 2 high frequency
‘others’
 Substantial benefits for self but NOT for paired ‘other’
 Low probability trials - self advantage is automatic
 High probability trials - self expectation is dominant

63. Self-, reward-, and emotion-biases
£8£0.5
YouFriend

64. The left frontal lesion
associated with three
types of hyper-biases
Self-, reward-, and emotion-biases

65. The left temporal-
parietal lesion
associated with hyper-
self-bias only
Self-, reward-, and emotion-biases

66. The left insula and
vmPFC lesion associated
with hypo-self and
hyper-emotion
Self-, reward-, and emotion-biases

67.  To assess effects related to the newly associated
shape and the label, we examined mismatch trials
3 types of mismatch
 Self shape + ‘other’ (friend/stranger) label (1)
 ‘Other’ (friend/stranger) shape + self label (2)
 Friend shape/label + stranger shape/label (3)
 Self shape: (1) – (3)
 Self label: (2) – (3)

68. Dynamic causal model: vmPFC - LpSTS
Three family models: input entering
through the LpSTS, through the
vmPFC, or through both two regions.

69. Also varies across the age range
Effect remains with RTs normalised

70. Activity in the classic
dorsal attention control
network
Consistent with the more
difficult task

71. On mismatch trials you can examine activity linked to the
self shape, the self label or neither
Relations between brain activity and behaviour

72. Effect on perception: change the contrast of the shape
Effects of social
association modulates
effects of stimulus contrast
on perceptual sensitivity
Evidence for a perceptual
locus
Is this effect stable – like a trait measure?

73.  Effects of social significance can be
established in simple perceptual matching
tasks
 Effects modulate perception (redundancy,
stimulus contrast)
 Effects stable across individuals over time

74. Part 3: Brain mechanisms of the effects
 Participants performed the self-association match
task in the scanner
 How do brain states change to generate the effect
(Sui, Rotshtein & Humphreys, 2013, PNAS)?

75. vmPFC classically associated
with self processing
LpSTS linked to the ventral
attentional network
Linking of self to socially
salient signal

76. Dynamic causal model:
Stronger intrinsic
connectivity
from vmPFC 
LpSTS, the
more efficient
performance for
matching self trials

77. Activity in the classic
dorsal attention control
network
Consistent with the more
difficult task

78. Opposite roles
in two neural
networks
Self tagging - a neural circuit of
vmPFC  LpSTS
Self tagging - a neural circuit of
vmPFC  LpSTS
Other-tagging - the frontal-parietal
control network
Other-tagging - the frontal-parietal
control network
Sui, Rotshtein, & Humphreys, 2013,
PNAS

79.  Conclusions:
 Self-matching affected by a neural circuit
connecting self representations (vmPFC) 
attentional responses to sensory signals (LpSTS)
 Strength of connections within this circuit
determine the efficiency of behaviour to self-
associated stimuli
 Self-attention network distinct from the classic
fronto-parietal attentrional network

80. Mevorach et al. (2006, Nature Neuroscience)
People respond faster to whichever level is more salient,
and they show less interference from the other (distractor)
level

81.  These effects of perceptual saliency have been
linked with neural control centres in posterior parietal
cortex
 Evidence from fMRI studies where the magnitude of
interference from salient distractors in manipulated
(Mevorach et al., 2009, JCoN)

82. Target low saliency & distractor high saliency –
target high saliency & distractor low saliency
Cluster along the left IPS shows increased
response when high saliency distractors need
to be rejected Left IPS works harder to reject
such distractors?
Are there similar behavioural and
neural effects with social saliency?

83.  4 experiments
 Experiment 1 – demonstrating performance
with neutral shapes
 Experiment 2 – demonstrating the pattern of
performance when perceptual saliency of the
shapes is varied
 Experiment 3 – demonstrating effects of social
saliency
 Experiment 4 - fMRI

84. Experiment 1: Neutral shapes

85. Global < local Equal congruency effects at each level
Experiment 2: Vary perceptual saliency

87. High saliency distractors, greater interference

88.  Can these effects be mimicked by manipulating social
rather than perceptual salience?
 Hexagon  self, square  friend, circle  other
 Task = identify the shape at the target level as being you
or friend

90. Effects of social saliency
Maximal for self vs. friend

91.  Does self association change the brain’s
response to stimuli
 Run the local-global experiment in the scanner

92. Overlap of neural response to social saliency and
perceptual saliency