Cognitive control of involuntary distraction by deviant sounds.

It is well established that a task-irrelevant sound (deviant sound) departing from an otherwise repetitive sequence of sounds (standard sounds) elicits an involuntary capture of attention and orienting response toward the deviant stimulus, resulting in the lengthening of response times in an ongoing task. Some have argued that this type of distraction can be reduced by cognitive control when visual stimuli cue the presentation of the deviant and standard sounds. We compared this account with an alternative explanation, namely, that cues may reduce distraction because cue processing depletes attentional resources from the orienting response to the deviant sound. We report the results of an experiment in which participants judged the movement direction of sounds in the absence of cues and in conditions in which the type of sound was cued early or immediately before the sounds. We found that cues predicting the presentation of deviant sounds eliminated behavioral distraction irrespective of the time available to process them. This finding lends support to the contention that distraction by deviant sounds can be reduced through cognitive control and rule out the division of attention as an alternative explanation of our results and those from past studies.

[1]  Erich Schröger,et al.  Cognitive control of involuntary attention and distraction in children and adolescents , 2007, Brain Research.

[2]  E. Schröger,et al.  Two separate mechanisms underlie auditory change detection and involuntary control of attention , 2006, Brain Research.

[3]  C. Summerfield,et al.  An information theoretical approach to prefrontal executive function , 2007, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[4]  E. Schröger,et al.  Behavioral and electrophysiological effects of task-irrelevant sound change: a new distraction paradigm. , 1998, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[5]  R. Knight,et al.  Neural Mechanisms of Involuntary Attention to Acoustic Novelty and Change , 1998, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[6]  Risto N t nen Attention and brain function , 1992 .

[7]  I. Winkler Interpreting the Mismatch Negativity , 2007 .

[8]  S. Hackley The speeding of voluntary reaction by a warning signal. , 2009, Psychophysiology.

[9]  E Donchin,et al.  On how P300 amplitude varies with the utility of the eliciting stimuli. , 1978, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[10]  Erich Schrger,et al.  A Neural Mechanism for Involuntary Attention Shifts to Changes in Auditory Stimulation , 1996, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[11]  I. Winkler,et al.  Top-down control over involuntary attention switching in the auditory modality , 2003, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[12]  R. Näätänen,et al.  The mismatch negativity (MMN) in basic research of central auditory processing: A review , 2007, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[13]  F. Parmentier,et al.  Distraction by auditory novelty. The course and aftermath of novelty and semantic effects. , 2011, Experimental psychology.

[14]  Erich Schröger,et al.  Memory trace formation for abstract auditory features and its consequences in different attentional contexts , 2008, Biological Psychology.

[15]  Erich Schröger,et al.  Distraction effects in vision: behavioral and event-related potential indices , 2004, Neuroreport.

[16]  S. Hackley,et al.  Accessory Stimulus Effects on Response Selection: Does Arousal Speed Decision Making? , 1999, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[17]  F. Parmentier,et al.  Behavioral distraction by auditory deviance is mediated by the sound's informational value. Evidence from an auditory discrimination task. , 2013, Experimental psychology.

[18]  Peng Yuan,et al.  The effect of visuospatial attentional load on the processing of irrelevant acoustic distractors , 2006, NeuroImage.

[19]  M. Maybery,et al.  The involuntary capture of attention by novel feature pairings: A study of voice—location integration in auditory sensory memory , 2010, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[20]  Erich Schröger,et al.  Auditory distraction: event-related potential and behavioral indices , 2000, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[21]  D. Vernon,et al.  Event-Related Brain Potential Correlates of Human Auditory Sensory Memory-Trace Formation , 2005, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[22]  F. Barceló,et al.  Why are auditory novels distracting? Contrasting the roles of novelty, violation of expectation and stimulus change , 2011, Cognition.

[23]  I. Winkler,et al.  Preventing distraction: Assessing stimulus-specific and general effects of the predictive cueing of deviant auditory events , 2011, Biological Psychology.

[24]  F. Parmentier,et al.  Cross-modal distraction by deviance: functional similarities between the auditory and tactile modalities. , 2012, Experimental psychology.

[25]  E. Schröger,et al.  A comparison of auditory and visual distraction effects: behavioral and event-related indices. , 2001, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[26]  Erich Schröger,et al.  Processing of Abstract Rule Violations in Audition , 2007, PloS one.

[27]  Erich Schröger,et al.  Visual distraction: a behavioral and event-related brain potential study in humans , 2006, Neuroreport.

[28]  F. Parmentier,et al.  The informational constraints of behavioral distraction by unexpected sounds: the role of event information. , 2012, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[29]  I. Winkler,et al.  The concept of auditory stimulus representation in cognitive neuroscience. , 1999, Psychological bulletin.

[30]  Jessica K. Ljungberg,et al.  The Impact of Intonation and Valence on Objective and Subjective Attention Capture by Auditory Alarms , 2012, Hum. Factors.

[31]  John J. Foxe,et al.  Mapping the functional anatomy of task preparation: Priming task‐appropriate brain networks , 2006, Human brain mapping.

[32]  P. Andrés,et al.  The involuntary capture of attention by sound: novelty and postnovelty distraction in young and older adults. , 2010, Experimental psychology.

[33]  Cordula Hölig,et al.  To switch or not to switch: Brain potential indices of attentional control after task-relevant and task-irrelevant changes of stimulus features , 2010, Brain Research.

[34]  E. Schröger On the detection of auditory deviations: a pre-attentive activation model. , 1997, Psychophysiology.

[35]  I. Winkler,et al.  The concept of auditory stimulus representation in cognitive neuroscience. , 1999, Psychological bulletin.

[36]  Erich Schröger,et al.  Auditory distraction by duration and location deviants: a behavioral and event-related potential study. , 2003, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[37]  F. Parmentier Towards a cognitive model of distraction by auditory novelty: The role of involuntary attention capture and semantic processing , 2008, Cognition.

[38]  C. Escera,et al.  Effects of sound location on visual task performance and electrophysiological measures of distraction , 2008, Neuroreport.

[39]  R. Näätänen The role of attention in auditory information processing as revealed by event-related potentials and other brain measures of cognitive function , 1990, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[40]  C Alain,et al.  Effects of visual attentional load on auditory processing , 2000, Neuroreport.

[41]  Anna Christina Nobre,et al.  Anticipating Conflict Facilitates Controlled Stimulus-response Selection , 2009, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[42]  C. Escera,et al.  The cognitive locus of distraction by acoustic novelty in the cross-modal oddball task , 2008, Cognition.

[43]  F. Parmentier,et al.  A dual contribution to the involuntary semantic processing of unexpected spoken words. , 2014, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[44]  E. Schröger,et al.  The cognitive control of distraction by novelty in children aged 7-8 and adults. , 2009, Psychophysiology.

[45]  Erich Schröger,et al.  Working memory controls involuntary attention switching: evidence from an auditory distraction paradigm , 2003, The European journal of neuroscience.

[46]  Jessica K Ljungberg,et al.  A behavioral study of distraction by vibrotactile novelty. , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[47]  E. Schröger,et al.  Bottom-up influences on working memory: behavioral and electrophysiological distraction varies with distractor strength. , 2004, Experimental psychology.

[48]  J Horváth,et al.  Simultaneously active pre-attentive representations of local and global rules for sound sequences in the human brain. , 2001, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[49]  I. Winkler,et al.  I Heard That Coming: Event-Related Potential Evidence for Stimulus-Driven Prediction in the Auditory System , 2009, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[50]  S. Berti Cognitive control after distraction: event-related brain potentials (ERPs) dissociate between different processes of attentional allocation. , 2008, Psychophysiology.

[51]  Jessica K. Ljungberg,et al.  Behavioral distraction by auditory novelty is not only about novelty: The role of the distracter’s informational value , 2010, Cognition.

[52]  P. J. Foley The foreperiod and simple reaction time. , 1959, Canadian journal of psychology.

[53]  I. Winkler,et al.  Do N1/MMN, P3a, and RON form a strongly coupled chain reflecting the three stages of auditory distraction? , 2008, Biological Psychology.

[54]  E. Miller,et al.  An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. , 2001, Annual review of neuroscience.

[55]  Carles Escera,et al.  The effect of age on involuntary capture of attention by irrelevant sounds: A test of the frontal hypothesis of aging , 2006, Neuropsychologia.

[56]  P. Paavilainen,et al.  Preattentive detection of nonsalient contingencies between auditory features , 2007, Neuroreport.

[57]  E. Koechlin,et al.  The Architecture of Cognitive Control in the Human Prefrontal Cortex , 2003, Science.

[58]  E. Schröger The mismatch negativity as a tool to study auditory processing , 2005 .