Neural suppression of distractors surrounding the spotlight: Evidence from steady-state visual evoked potentials

The present study investigated the allocation of spatial attention using steady-state visual evoked potentials (SSVEPs). The SSVEP is elicited in visual cortical areas by a repetitive flicker having the same fundamental frequency as the driving stimulus. Two flickers were applied with the letter stream presented in the center of the monitor and the distractor presented on either the left or right side of the target. Participants were instructed to detect the target letter in the letter stream. The distance of the two flickers was manipulated. The results show that the amplitudes of the SSVEPs elicited by the distractor were enhanced when it was in the closest position and suppressed when it was at a farther distance. But the amplitudes rebounded at the farthest distance. Meanwhile, the SSVEP elicited by the target flicker remained stable independent of the distance of the distractor. Thus, the present study indicates that focused attention involves neural suppression surrounding the classic “spotlight”, and the SSVEP paradigms open new avenues for studying the attentional suppression mechanism.

[1]  Notger G. Müller,et al.  Attention-modulated activity in visual cortex—More than a simple ‘spotlight’ , 2008, NeuroImage.

[2]  I..  THE ATTENTION SYSTEM OF THE HUMAN BRAIN , 2002 .

[3]  John K. Tsotsos,et al.  The center-surround profile of the focus of attention arises from recurrent processing in visual cortex. , 2009, Cerebral cortex.

[4]  Matthias M. Müller,et al.  Concurrent recording of steady-state and transient event-related potentials as indices of visual-spatial selective attention , 2000, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[5]  Scott D Slotnick,et al.  Darkness beyond the light: attentional inhibition surrounding the classic spotlight , 2002, Neuroreport.

[6]  S. Andersen,et al.  Behavioral performance follows the time course of neural facilitation and suppression during cued shifts of feature-selective attention , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[7]  Jens Schwarzbach,et al.  Attentional inhibition of visual processing in human striate and extrastriate cortex , 2003, NeuroImage.

[8]  Matthias M. Müller,et al.  Can the Spotlight of Attention Be Shaped Like a Doughnut? Evidence From Steady-State Visual Evoked Potentials , 2002 .

[9]  Matthias M. Müller,et al.  The time course of cortical facilitation during cued shifts of spatial attention , 1998, Nature Neuroscience.

[10]  M. Posner,et al.  Attention and the detection of signals. , 1980, Journal of experimental psychology.

[11]  Diane M. Beck,et al.  Top-down and bottom-up mechanisms in biasing competition in the human brain , 2009, Vision Research.

[12]  S. Hillyard,et al.  Selective attention to stimulus location modulates the steady-state visual evoked potential. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[13]  Arno Villringer,et al.  A Physiological Correlate of the “Zoom Lens” of Visual Attention , 2003, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[14]  John K. Tsotsos,et al.  Direct neurophysiological evidence for spatial suppression surrounding the focus of attention in vision. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

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

[16]  A. Kleinschmidt,et al.  The attentional field has a Mexican hat distribution , 2005, Vision Research.

[17]  J. Evans.  The Stone Age in Egypt , 1870, Nature.