I am working as a post-doc on the ERC-project ‘What you get is what you see: How reward determines perception’ together with my advisor, professor Jan Theeuwes.
I became particularly interested in visual attention during my Master’s research in Cognitive Psychology at the University of Groningen. Motivated by this, I moved to Amsterdam to become a Ph.D. student in Jan Theeuwes’ lab, where I studied several aspects of spatial attention and working memory using behavioral and functional MRI methodologies. After pursuing related interests in object- and natural scene processing during my post-doc in Rovereto, Italy, I returned to Amsterdam where I am currently investigating the influence of reward on attention.
My research is concerned with how what we pay attention to shapes our perception of the world around us. In addition to my recent work investigating the effects of reward history and learning on attentional guidance, my previous research has focused mainly on the neural correlates of visual-spatial attention, the neural and behavioral overlap between spatial attention and working memory and the way attention modulates processing of irrelevant information within a visual scene. I use a variety of psychophysical and neuroimaging (mainly fMRI and EEG) measures to investigate questions related to these topics.
Recently, as a part of Jan Theeuwes’ ERC grant, I have begun to explore the effects of reward on perception. Building on my previous research in visual attention, I am investigating how reward and attention interact. Attention guided by reward does not fit the classic dichotomy of bottom-up and top-down attention, but seems to be a separate and independent means of attentional deployment based on selection history. Along these lines, I am interested in how reward changes the encoding of visual stimuli (e.g., do rewarded stimuli reach awareness faster?).
|J Munneke, SS Hoppenbrouwers, B Little, K Kooiman, E van der Burg & ... (2018) Comparing the response modulation hypothesis and the integrated emotions system theory: The role of top-down attention in psychopathy. Personality and Individual Differences 122, 134-139|
|SS Hoppenbrouwers, J Munneke, KA Kooiman, B Little, CS Neumann & ... (2017) Fearful faces do not lead to faster attentional deployment in individuals with elevated psychopathic traits. Journal of psychopathology and behavioral assessment 39 (4), 596-604|
|J Corbett, A Clarke & J Munneke (2017) Combining individual estimates to maximize detection performance. Journal of Vision 17 (10), 1141-1141|
|J Munneke & J Corbett (2017) The Influence of Saliency and Value on Perceptual Averaging.. Journal of Vision 17 (10), 1300-1300|
|D Preciado, J Munneke & J Theeuwes (2017) Mixed signals: The effect of conflicting reward-and goal-driven biases on selective attention. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 1-14|
|D Preciado, J Munneke & J Theeuwes (2017) Was that a threat? Attentional biases by signals of threat.. Emotion 17 (3), 478||2|
|J Munneke, AV Belopolsky & J Theeuwes (2016) Distractors associated with reward break through the focus of attention. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 78 (7), 2213-2225||7|
|J Munneke, A Belopolsky & J Theeuwes (2016) Direct and Indirect Mechanisms of Value-Driven Attentional Guidance. Journal of Vision 16 (12), 82-82|
|D Preciado, J Munneke & J Theeuwes (2016) Was that a threat? A cueing study on attentional guidance by threat signals. Journal of Vision 16 (12), 83-83||1|
|DF Preciado Vanegas, JA Munneke & JL Theeuwes (2016) Was that a threat? A cueing study on attentional guidance by threat signals.|
|J Munneke, SS Hoppenbrouwers & J Theeuwes (2015) Reward can modulate attentional capture, independent of top-down set. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 77 (8), 2540-2548||19|
|DF Preciado Vanegas, J Munneke & J Theeuwes (2015) Was that a threat? Attentional guidance by aversive signals.|
|J Munneke, E Fait & V Mazza (2013) Attentional processing of multiple targets and distractors. Psychophysiology 50 (11), 1104-1108||3|
|J Munneke, V Brentari & MV Peelen (2013) The influence of scene context on object recognition. Journal of Vision 13 (9), 1052-1052|
|J Munneke, V Brentari & MV Peelen (2013) The influence of scene context on object recognition is independent of attentional focus. Frontiers in psychology 4||17|
|J Munneke, AV Belopolsky & J Theeuwes (2012) Shifting attention within memory representations involves early visual areas. PLoS One 7 (4), e35528||14|
|J Munneke, DJ Heslenfeld, WM Usrey, J Theeuwes & GR Mangun (2011) Preparatory effects of distractor suppression: evidence from visual cortex. PloS one 6 (12), e27700||8|
|J Munneke, A Belopolsky & J Theeuwes (2011) Effects of updating visuo-spatial working memory in early visual cortex. Journal of Vision 11 (11), 1266-1266|
|J Munneke, DJ Heslenfeld & J Theeuwes (2010) Spatial working memory effects in early visual cortex. Brain and cognition 72 (3), 368-377||48|
|J Munneke, S Van der Stigchel & J Theeuwes (2008) Cueing the location of a distractor: An inhibitory mechanism of spatial attention?. Acta Psychologica 129 (1), 101-107||53|