Persistent effects of salience in visual working memory: Limits of cue-driven guidance.

Visual working memory (VWM) is a core cognitive system enabling us to select and briefly store relevant visual information. We recently observed that more salient items were recalled more precisely from VWM and demonstrated that these effects of salience resisted manipulations of reward, probability, and selection history. Here, we investigated whether and how salience interacts with shifts of attention induced by pre- and retrocueing.

Priming of pop-out in the spatial-cueing paradigm.

Searching for a unique target is faster when its unique feature repeats than when it changes. The standard account for this priming-of-popout (PoP) phenomenon is that selecting a target increases the attentional priority of its features in subsequent searches. However, empirical tests of this priority account have yielded contradictory findings.

Do you look longer at attractive faces? It depends on what you are looking for.

Evolutionary psychology suggests that we are attuned to relevant information in the environment. For example, attention may be attracted by physical beauty because it is important for finding a partner with good reproductive health. Consistently, previous studies found that attention stayed longer on attractive than unattractive faces.

Effects of spatial location on distractor interference.

When target and distractor stimuli are close together, they activate the same neurons and there is ambiguity as to what the neural activity represents. It has been suggested that the ambiguity is resolved by spatial competition between target and nontarget stimuli. A competitive advantage is conveyed by bottom-up biases (e.

Trial history contributes to the optimal tuning of attention.

In visual search tasks, targets are difficult to find when they are similar to the surrounding nontargets. In this scenario, it is optimal to tune attention to target features that maximize the difference between target and nontargets. We investigated whether the optimal tuning of attention is driven by biases arising from previously attended stimuli (i.

Terms of debate: Consensus definitions to guide the scientific discourse on visual distraction.

Hypothesis-driven research rests on clearly articulated scientific theories. The building blocks for communicating these theories are scientific terms. Obviously, communication - and thus, scientific progress - is hampered if the meaning of these terms varies idiosyncratically across (sub)fields and even across individual researchers within the same subfield.

The Distractor Positivity Component and the Inhibition of Distracting Stimuli.

There has been a long-lasting debate about whether salient stimuli, such as uniquely colored objects, have the ability to automatically distract us. To resolve this debate, it has been suggested that salient stimuli do attract attention but that they can be suppressed to prevent distraction. Some research supporting this viewpoint has focused on a newly discovered ERP component called the distractor positivity (PD), which is thought to measure an inhibitory attentional process.

The PD Reflects Selection of Nontarget Locations, Not Distractor Suppression.

In visual search tasks, negative features provide information about stimuli that can be excluded from search. It has been shown that these negative features help participants to locate the target, possibly by attentional suppression of stimuli sharing the negative feature. Attentional suppression is assumed to be reflected in an event-related potential, the PD component.

Search mode, not the attentional window, determines the magnitude of attentional capture.

A salient color distractor is known to capture attention during search for a less salient shape target, but the mechanisms underlying attentional capture are debated. Theeuwes (2004, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11(1), 65-70) argued that attentional capture depends on the size of the attentional window. If the attentional window is large, search is efficient and attentional capture should be stronger because the distractor is more likely to be inside the window.

Does attentional suppression occur at the level of perception or decision-making? Evidence from Gaspelin et al.'s (2015) probe letter task.

Visual attention is often inadvertently captured by salient stimuli. It was suggested that it is possible to prevent attentional capture in some search tasks by suppressing salient stimuli below baseline. Evidence for attentional suppression comes from a probe task that was interleaved with the main search task.

The allocation of working memory resources determines the efficiency of attentional templates in single- and dual-target search.

Attentional templates are representations of target features in working memory (WM). Although two attentional templates can guide visual search in dual-target search, search efficiency is reduced compared with one attentional template in single-target search. Here, we investigated whether the allocation of WM resources contributes to these differences.

Biased Competition between Targets and Distractors Reduces Attentional Suppression: Evidence from the Positivity Posterior Contralateral and Distractor Positivity.

The biased competition account claims that competition between two stimuli increases when they are close together compared with when they are far apart. The reason is that nearby stimuli are more likely to be represented in the same receptive fields, requiring top-down or bottom-up biases to resolve the ambiguity. Consistent with biased competition, previous research showed that an index of attentional enhancement, the N2pc component, was attenuated when two targets were close together.

Guidance of visual search by negative attentional templates depends on task demands.

Visual search for a target is faster when its features are known before the search display appears, but there is an ongoing discussion about whether knowledge of nontarget features has a similar effect. Stored target or nontarget features used to guide visual search are referred to as positive or negative attentional templates, respectively. We suggest that the inconsistent findings concerning negative attentional templates may arise from 2 methodological choices in past research.

Statistical learning in visual search reflects distractor rarity, not only attentional suppression.

In visual search tasks, salient distractors may capture attention involuntarily, but interference can be reduced when the salient distractor appears more frequently on one out of several possible positions. The reduction was attributed to attentional suppression of the high-probability position. However, all previous studies on this topic compared performance on the high-probability position to the remaining positions, which had a low probability of containing the distractor.

Capacity limitations in template-guided multiple color search.

Visual selection of target objects relies on representations of their known features in visual working memory. These representations are referred to as attentional templates. We asked how the capacity of visual working memory relates to the maximal number of attentional templates that can simultaneously guide visual selection.

Do we need attentional suppression?

Gaspelin and Luck describe the signal suppression hypothesis, which proposes that attentional suppression prevents the capture of visual attention by salient distractors. We will discuss several problems with this proposal. On a theoretical level, we will argue that attentional suppression is a dispensable mechanism.

Attentional guidance by irrelevant features depends on their successful encoding into working memory.

Attentional selection is guided by templates of the target in working memory. It has been proposed that attentional templates integrate target features (e.g.

Attentional templates are protected from retroactive interference during visual search: Converging evidence from event-related potentials.

Attentional templates are stored representations of target features that guide visual search. Target features may remain fixed or change on every trial, requiring sustained or transient templates, respectively. In separate blocks of trials, two sustained templates guide visual search as efficiently as two transient templates.

Meeting another's gaze shortens subjective time by capturing attention.

Gaze directed at the observer (direct gaze) is an important and highly salient social signal with multiple effects on cognitive processes and behavior. It is disputed whether the effect of direct gaze is caused by attentional capture or increased arousal. Time estimation may provide an answer because attentional capture predicts an underestimation of time whereas arousal predicts an overestimation.

Allocation of resources in working memory: Theoretical and empirical implications for visual search.

Recently, working memory (WM) has been conceptualized as a limited resource, distributed flexibly and strategically between an unlimited number of representations. In addition to improving the precision of representations in WM, the allocation of resources may also shape how these representations act as attentional templates to guide visual search. Here, we reviewed recent evidence in favor of this assumption and proposed three main principles that govern the relationship between WM resources and template-guided visual search.

Visual selective attention and the control of tracking eye movements: a critical review.

People's eyes are directed at objects of interest with the aim of acquiring visual information. However, processing this information is constrained in capacity, requiring task-driven and salience-driven attentional mechanisms to select few among the many available objects. A wealth of behavioral and neurophysiological evidence has demonstrated that visual selection and the motor selection of saccade targets rely on shared mechanisms.

Attentional Templates Are Sharpened through Differential Signal Enhancement, Not Differential Allocation of Attention.

In visual search, the internal representation of the target feature is referred to as the attentional template. The attentional template can be broad or precise depending on the task requirements. In singleton search, the attentional template is broad because the target is the only colored element in the display.

Statistical regularities cause attentional suppression with target-matching distractors.

Visual search may be disrupted by the presentation of salient, but irrelevant stimuli. To reduce the impact of salient distractors, attention may suppress their processing below baseline level. While there are many studies on the attentional suppression of distractors with features distinct from the target (e.

New templates interfere with existing templates depending on their respective priority in visual working memory.

Attentional templates are stored representations of target features that guide visual search. While transiently active templates are as efficient as templates held in a sustained fashion, their simultaneous activation generates costs for the sustained template. Here, we investigated whether the quality of the memory representation determines these costs.

Direct evidence for the optimal tuning of attention.

In search arrays where the target is presented with similar nontarget stimuli, it is advantageous to shift the internal representation of the target features away from the nontarget features. According to optimal tuning theory (Navalpakkam & Itti, 2007), the shift of the attentional template increases the signal-to-noise ratio because the overlap of neural populations representing the target and nontarget features is reduced. While previous research has shown that the internal representation of the target is indeed shifted, there is little evidence in favor of a shift in attentional selectivity.