Recent evidence suggests that attention is more likely allocated to stimuli related to currently prioritized goals (Vogt et al., 2011). Additionally, this prioritization of temporary goals can lead to attention being directed away from stimuli that signal threat in a dot-probe paradigm (Vogt et al., 2013) This is in stark contrast to the notion that attention is deployed to threatening stimuli as an automatic process thought to benefit evolutionary fitness (e.g. LeDoux, 1996). However, findings of this goal prioritization effect in attention are subject to some caveats. The main concern is that the cue-target onset asynchrony (CTOA) used in previous studies (350 ms or more) is considerably longer than what is typically employed in basic exogenous cueing experiments. In our study we therefore realized two timing conditions with a CTOA of 100 ms and 350 ms. A dot-probe paradigm was used with displays that pitted neutral, goal related, and threat related pictures against each other. Goal relatedness was induced by intermixed trials, where participants won points by reacting to a specific neutral picture deemed as the goal picture. We replicated findings from Vogt and colleagues, with goals being attentionally prioritized over threat and neutral. However no significant differences were found between timing conditions. This shows that the goal effect holds true, even under conditions better suited to basic attention research. Additionally, we observed, that threat pictures (competing with neutral pictures) produced a negative cueing effect so as if they tend to divert attention away from themselves, rather than attracting attention.