Attention, perception & psychophysics

https://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/efetch.fcgi?db=pubmed&id=33206360&retmode=xml&tool=Litmetric&email=readroberts32@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09 332063602021021220210212

1943-393X8312021JanAttention, perception & psychophysicsAtten Percept PsychophysThe guidance of attention by templates for rejection during visual search.385738-5710.3758/s13414-020-02191-zThe hypothesis that foreknowledge of nontarget features in visual search is represented by negative search templates ("templates for rejection") that facilitate attentional guidance remains disputed. In five experiments, we investigated this proposal by measuring search performance and electrophysiological markers of target selection (N2pc components) and nontarget suppression (P_D components). We compared search tasks where positive or negative cues signaled the color of targets or nontargets, respectively, and tasks with neutral non-informative cues. Positive cues elicited performance benefits relative to neutral cues. Negative cues produced behavioral and electrophysiological costs for target selection, and some evidence for the inhibition of negatively cued nontargets, but there was no support for the proposal that these items initially attract attention. Performance costs for negative cues dissipated after practice with the same negatively cued nontargets for approximately 25-50 trials, and eventually turned into benefits after several hundreds of trials. However, the emergence of negative cue benefits was not accompanied by electrophysiological evidence for faster or more efficient inhibition of nontargets, indicating that they are not produced by learned suppression mechanisms mediated by negative search templates. We conclude that templates for rejection do not facilitate search but normally interfere with target selection. Although negative cue benefits can be observed after extended exposure to the same nontarget features, these benefits do not reflect active attentional guidance, and are likely to be the result of passive habituation processes.BerggrenNickNDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck College, University of London, Malet Street, London, WC1E 7HX, UK. nbergg01@mail.bbk.ac.uk.EimerMartinMDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck College, University of London, Malet Street, London, WC1E 7HX, UK.engES/R003459/1Economic and Social Research CouncilJournal Article20201118

United StatesAtten Percept Psychophys1014953841943-3921IMAttentionColor PerceptionCuesElectroencephalographyHumansInhibition, PsychologicalReaction TimeVisual PerceptionEvent-related brain potentialsInhibitionSelective attentionTop-down controlVisual search202010222020111960202121360202011181214ppublish3320636010.3758/s13414-020-02191-z10.3758/s13414-020-02191-zArita, J.T., Carlisle, N.B., & Woodman, G.F. (2012). Templates for rejection: Configuring attention to ignore task-irrelevant features. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 580-584.22468723Beck, V.M., & Hollingworth, A. (2015). Evidence for negative feature guidance in visual search is explained by spatial recoding. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 41, 1190-1196.26191616Beck, V.M., Luck, S.J., & Hollingworth, A. (2018). Whatever you do, don’t look at the…: Evaluating guidance by an exclusionary attentional template. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 44, 645-662.29035075Bell, R., Röer, J.P., Dentale, S., & Buchner, A. (2012). Habituation of the irrelevant sound effect: Evidence for an attentional theory of short-term memory disruption. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 38, 1542-1557.Berggren, N., & Eimer, M. (2018). Object-based target templates guide attention during visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 44, 1368-1382.29723006Berggren, N., Nako, R., & Eimer, M. (2020). Out with the old: New target templates impair the guidance of visual search by preexisting task goals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 149, 1156-1168.Carlisle, N.B., & Nitka, A.W. (2019). Location-based explanations do not account for active attentional suppression. Visual Cognition, 27, 305-316.Chelazzi, L., Marini, F., Pascucci, D., & Turatto, M. (2019). Getting rid of visual distractors: The why, when, how, and where. Current Opinion in Psychology, 29, 135-147.30856512Conci, M., Deichsel, C., Müller, H.J., & Töllner, T. (2019). Feature guidance by negative attentional templates depends on search difficulty. Visual Cognition, 27, 317-326.Cunningham, C.A., & Egeth, H.E. (2016). Taming the white bear: Initial costs and eventual benefits of distractor inhibition. Psychological Science, 27, 476-485.26893292Duncan, J., & Humphreys, G. (1992). Beyond the search surface: Visual search and attentional engagement. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 578-588.1593236Eimer, M. (1996). The N2pc component as an indicator of attentional selectivity. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 99, 225-234.8862112Eimer, M. (2014). The neural basis of attentional control in visual search. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18, 526-535.24930047Eimer, M., & Kiss, M. (2008). Involuntary attentional capture is determined by task set: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20, 1423-1433.183039792564114Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175-191.Feldmann-Wüstefeld, T., Busch, N.A., & Schubö, A. (2020). Failed suppression of salient stimuli precedes behavioral errors. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 32, 367-377.31702429Folk, C.L., Remington, R.W., & Johnston, J.C. (1992). Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 1030-1044.1431742Gaspar, J.M., & McDonald, J.J. (2014). Suppression of salient objects prevents distraction in visual search. Journal of Neuroscience, 34, 5658-5666.24741056Gaspelin, N., Leonard, C.J., & Luck, S.J. (2017). Suppression of overt attentional capture by salient-but-irrelevant color singletons. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 79, 45-62.Gaspelin, N., & Luck, S.J. (2018a). Distinguishing among potential mechanisms of singleton suppression. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 44, 626-644.29035072Gaspelin, N., & Luck, S.J. (2018b). The role of inhibition in avoiding distraction by salient stimuli. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 22, 79-92.29191511Grubert, A., Carlisle, N.B., & Eimer, M. (2016). The control of single-color and multiple-color visual search by attentional templates in working memory and in long-term memory. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 28, 1947-1963.27458746Grubert, A., & Eimer, M. (2016). All set, indeed! N2pc components reveal simultaneous attentional control settings for multiple target colors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 42, 1215-1230.26950386Grubert, A., & Eimer, M. (2018). The time course of target template activation processes during preparation for visual search. Journal of Neuroscience, 38, 9527-9538.30242053Hickey, C., Di Lollo, V., & McDonald, J.J. (2009). Electrophysiological indices of target and distractor processing in visual search. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 21, 760-775.18564048Hopf, J.M., Luck, S.J., Girelli, M., Hagner, T., Mangun, G.R., Scheich, H., & Heinze, H.J. (2000). Neural sources of focused attention in visual search. Cerebral Cortex, 10, 1233-1241.11073872Irons, J.L., Folk, C.L., & Remington, R.W. (2012). All set! Evidence of simultaneous attentional control settings for multiple target colors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 758-775.22201470Lien, M-C., Ruthruff, E., & Cornett, L. (2010). Attentional control by singletons is contingent on top-down control settings: Evidence from electrophysiological measures. Visual Cognition, 18, 682-727.Luck, S.J., & Hillyard, S.A. (1994). Spatial filtering during visual search: Evidence from human electrophysiology. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 1000-1014.7964526Luck, S.J., & Kappenman, E.S. (2011). The Oxford handbook of event-related potential components. Oxford University Press.Miller, J., Patterson, T., & Ulrich, R. (1998). Jackknife-based method for measuring LRP onset latency differences. Psychophysiology, 35, 99-115.9499711Moher, J., & Egeth, H.E. (2012). The ignoring paradox: Cueing distractor features leads first to selection, then to inhibition of to-be-ignored items. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 74, 1590-1605.Olivers, C.N.L., Peters, J., Houtkamp, R., & Roelfsema, P.R. (2011). Different states in visual working memory: When it guides attention and when it does not. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 327-334.21665518Reeder, R.R., Olivers, C.N.L., & Pollmann, S. (2017). Cortical evidence for negative search templates. Visual Cognition, 25, 278-290.Sawaki, R., Geng, J.J., & Luck, S.J. (2012). A common neural mechanism for preventing and terminating the allocation of attention. Journal of Neuroscience, 32, 10725-10736.22855820Sawaki, R., & Luck, S.J. (2010). Capture versus suppression of attention by salient singletons: Electrophysiological evidence for an automatic attend-to-me signal. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72, 1455-1470.Sokolov, E.N. (1963). Higher nervous functions: The orienting reflex. Annual Review of Physiology, 25, 545-580.13977960Turatto, M., Bonetti, F., Pascucci, D., & Chelazzi, L. (2018). Desensitizing the attention system to distraction while idling: A new latent learning phenomenon in the visual attention domain. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 147, 1827-1850.Turatto, M., & Pascucci, D. (2016). Short-term and long-term plasticity in the visual-attention system: Evidence from habituation of attentional capture. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, 130, 159-169.26927305Ulrich, R., & Miller, J. (2001). Using the jack-knife-based scoring method for measuring LRP onset effects in factorial designs. Psychophysiology, 38, 816-827.11577905Van Moorselaar, D., & Slagter, H.A. (2019). Learning what is irrelevant or relevant: Expectations facilitate distractor inhibition and target facilitation through distinct neural mechanisms. Journal of Neuroscience, 39, 6953-6967.31270162Vatterott, D.B., & Vecera, S.P. (2012). Experience-dependent attentional tuning of distractor rejection. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19, 871-878.Wang, B., van Driel, J., Ort, E., & Theeuwes, J. (2019). Anticipatory distractor suppression elicited by statistical regularities in visual search. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 31, 1535-1548.31180265Wolfe, J.M. (2007). Guided search 4.0: Current progress with a model of visual search. In W.D. Gray (Ed.), Series on cognitive models and architectures. Integrated models of cognitive systems (p. 99-119). Oxford University Press.Won, B-Y., & Geng, J.J. (in press). Passive exposure attenuates distraction during visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General.