Cueing distraction: electrophysiological evidence for anticipatory active suppression of distractor location

It is well known that processing at upcoming target locations can be facilitated, but mixed results have been obtained regarding the inhibition of irrelevant locations when advance information about distractors is available on a trial-to-trial basis. Here, we provide electrophysiological evidence that distractor locations can be anticipatorily suppressed. In an additional singleton search task, distractor cues were presented before the search display, which were either fully predictive or non-predictive of the location of the upcoming salient colour distractor. The PD component of the event-related potential, a marker of active suppression, was elicited by lateral singletons and smaller following predictive than non-predictive cues, indicating that less suppression was required upon presentation of the distractor when its location was known in advance. Presumably, excitability of regions processing the predictively cued locations was anticipatorily reduced to prevent distraction. This idea was further supported by the finding that larger individual cueing benefits in reaction time were associated with stronger reductions of the PD. There was no behavioural benefit at the group level, however, and implications for the role of individual differences and for the measurement of inhibition in distractor cueing tasks are discussed. The enhancement of target locations, reflected by the NT component, was not modulated by the predictiveness of the cues. Overall, our findings add to a growing literature highlighting the importance of inhibitory mechanisms for the guidance of spatial attention by showing that irrelevant locations can be anticipatorily suppressed in a top-down fashion, reducing the impact of even salient stimuli.

[1]  Steven J. Luck,et al.  The Role of Inhibition in Avoiding Distraction by Salient Stimuli , 2018, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[2]  David J. Prime,et al.  Inability to suppress salient distractors predicts low visual working memory capacity , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[3]  S. Luck,et al.  A Common Neural Mechanism for Preventing and Terminating the Allocation of Attention , 2012, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[4]  Edward K Vogel,et al.  Neural Evidence for the Contribution of Active Suppression During Working Memory Filtering , 2019, Cerebral cortex.

[5]  John M. Gaspar,et al.  Suppression of Salient Objects Prevents Distraction in Visual Search , 2014, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[6]  Steven J Luck,et al.  Capture versus suppression of attention by salient singletons: Electrophysiological evidence for an automatic attend-to-me signal , 2010, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[7]  Anna Schubö,et al.  You see what you have learned. Evidence for an interrelation of associative learning and visual selective attention. , 2015, Psychophysiology.

[8]  W. Usrey,et al.  Preparatory Effects of Distractor Suppression: Evidence from Visual Cortex , 2011, PloS one.

[9]  Leonardo Chelazzi,et al.  Altering spatial priority maps via statistical learning of target selection and distractor filtering , 2017, Cortex.

[10]  Steven J. Luck,et al.  Combined Electrophysiological and Behavioral Evidence for the Suppression of Salient Distractors , 2018, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[11]  Jon Driver,et al.  Attentional Preparation for a Lateralized Visual Distractor: Behavioral and fMRI Evidence , 2006, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[12]  Ali Jannati,et al.  Tracking target and distractor processing in fixed-feature visual search: evidence from human electrophysiology. , 2013, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[13]  M. Eimer The N2pc component as an indicator of attentional selectivity. , 1996, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[14]  H. Müller,et al.  Attentional capture by salient color singleton distractors is modulated by top-down dimensional set. , 2009, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[15]  Steven J. Luck,et al.  Suppression of overt attentional capture by salient-but-irrelevant color singletons , 2016, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.

[16]  M. Posner,et al.  Orienting of Attention* , 1980, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[17]  Joseph Krummenacher,et al.  Expectancies modulate attentional capture by salient color singletons , 2008, Vision Research.

[18]  Carly J. Leonard,et al.  Direct Evidence for Active Suppression of Salient-but-Irrelevant Sensory Inputs , 2015, Psychological science.

[19]  Steven J Luck,et al.  Active suppression of distractors that match the contents of visual working memory , 2011, Visual cognition.

[20]  R. Cook Detection of influential observation in linear regression , 2000 .

[21]  Dirk Kerzel,et al.  Active suppression of salient-but-irrelevant stimuli does not underlie resistance to visual interference , 2016, Biological Psychology.

[22]  Geoffrey F. Woodman,et al.  Serial deployment of attention during visual search. , 2003 .

[23]  Steven J. Luck,et al.  Electrophysiological Correlates of the Focusing of Attention within Complex Visual Scenes: N2pc and Related ERP Components , 2011 .

[24]  Roberto Dell'Acqua,et al.  Contralateral cortical organisation of information in visual short-term memory: Evidence from lateralized brain activity during retrieval , 2012, Neuropsychologia.

[25]  Vincent Di Lollo,et al.  Electrophysiological Indices of Target and Distractor Processing in Visual Search , 2009, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[26]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  How to inhibit a distractor location? Statistical learning versus active, top-down suppression , 2018, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.

[27]  M. Carrasco Visual attention: The past 25 years , 2011, Vision Research.

[28]  Veit Stuphorn,et al.  Trial-by-trial adjustments of top-down set modulate oculomotor capture , 2011, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[29]  Robert Oostenveld,et al.  FieldTrip: Open Source Software for Advanced Analysis of MEG, EEG, and Invasive Electrophysiological Data , 2010, Comput. Intell. Neurosci..

[30]  Veronica Mazza,et al.  Attentional processing of multiple targets and distractors. , 2013, Psychophysiology.

[31]  R. Desimone,et al.  Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. , 1995, Annual review of neuroscience.

[32]  J. Theeuwes,et al.  Cueing the location of a distractor: an inhibitory mechanism of spatial attention? , 2008, Acta psychologica.

[33]  H. Egeth,et al.  The power of negative thinking: Paradoxical but effective ignoring of salient-but-irrelevant stimuli with a spatial cue , 2018, Visual Cognition.

[34]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  Statistical Regularities Modulate Attentional Capture , 2018, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[35]  Howard E Egeth,et al.  The ignoring paradox: Cueing distractor features leads first to selection, then to inhibition of to-be-ignored items , 2012, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[36]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  Statistical regularities modulate attentional capture independent of search strategy , 2018, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.