Cortical Mechanisms of Prioritizing Selection for Rejection in Visual Search

In visual search, the more one knows about a target, the faster one can find it. Surprisingly, target identification is also faster with knowledge about distractor-features. The latter is paradoxical, as it implies that to avoid the selection of an item, the item must somehow be selected to some degree. This conundrum has been termed the “ignoring paradox”, and, to date, little is known about how the brain resolves it. Here, in data from four experiments using neuromagnetic brain recordings in male and female humans, we provide evidence that this paradox is resolved by giving distracting information priority in cortical processing. This attentional priority to distractors manifests as an enhanced early neuromagnetic index, which occurs before target-related processing, and regardless of distractor predictability. It is most pronounced on trials for which a response rapidly occurred, and is followed by a suppression of the distracting information. These observations together suggest that in visual search items cannot be ignored without first being selected. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT How can we ignore distracting stimuli in our environment? To do this successfully, a logical hypothesis is that as few neural resources as possible should be devoted to distractor processing. Yet, to avoid devoting resources to a distractor, the brain must somehow mark what to avoid; this is a philosophical problem, which has been termed the “ignoring paradox” or “white bear phenomenon”. Here, we use MEG recordings to determine how the human brain resolves this paradox. Our data show that distractors are not only processed, they are given temporal priority, with the brain building a robust representation of the to-be-ignored items. Thus, successful suppression of distractors can only be achieved if distractors are first strongly neurally represented.

[1]  Martin Eimer,et al.  Attentional capture by visual singletons is mediated by top-down task set: new evidence from the N2pc component. , 2008, Psychophysiology.

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

[3]  D. Wegner Ironic processes of mental control. , 1994, Psychological review.

[4]  M. Landy,et al.  The effect of viewpoint on perceived visual roughness. , 2007, Journal of vision.

[5]  Jason T. Arita,et al.  Templates for rejection: configuring attention to ignore task-irrelevant features. , 2012, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[6]  S. Luck,et al.  Electrophysiological correlates of feature analysis during visual search. , 1994, Psychophysiology.

[7]  Martin Eimer,et al.  Involuntary Attentional Capture is Determined by Task Set: Evidence from Event-related Brain Potentials , 2008, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[8]  J. Duncan,et al.  The Slow Time-Course of Visual Attention , 1996, Cognitive Psychology.

[9]  Jillian H. Fecteau,et al.  Priming of pop-out depends upon the current goals of observers. , 2007, Journal of vision.

[10]  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.

[11]  Dietmar Heinke,et al.  Prioritization in visual search: Visual marking is not dependent on a mnemonic search , 2002, Perception & psychophysics.

[12]  J. Theeuwes,et al.  The time course of exogenous and endogenous control of covert attention , 2009, Experimental Brain Research.

[13]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  Electrophysiological Evidence of the Capture of Visual Attention , 2013, J. Cogn. Neurosci..

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

[15]  D. Guthrie,et al.  Significance testing of difference potentials. , 1991, Psychophysiology.

[16]  J Duncan,et al.  Responses of neurons in macaque area V4 during memory-guided visual search. , 2001, Cerebral cortex.

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

[18]  G. Humphreys,et al.  An analysis of the time course of attention in preview search , 2004, Perception & psychophysics.

[19]  Jason T. Arita,et al.  A cuing study of the N2pc component: An index of attentional deployment to objects rather than spatial locations , 2009, Brain Research.

[20]  H. Egeth,et al.  Are attentional dwell times inconsistent with serial visual search? , 1996, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[21]  Kimron Shapiro,et al.  Direct measurement of attentional dwell time in human vision , 1994, Nature.

[22]  H. Müller,et al.  Searching for unknown feature targets on more than one dimension: Investigating a “dimension-weighting” account , 1996, Perception & psychophysics.

[23]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Priming of popout: III. A short-term implicit memory system beneficial for rapid target selection , 2000 .

[24]  Geoffrey F Woodman,et al.  Serial deployment of attention during visual search. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[25]  S. Shipp Structure and function of the cerebral cortex , 2007, Current Biology.

[26]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Priming of pop-out: I. Role of features , 1994, Memory & cognition.

[27]  R. Desimone,et al.  Responses of Neurons in Inferior Temporal Cortex during Memory- Guided Visual Search , 1998 .

[28]  Stephen E. Robinson Environmental Noise Cancellation for Biomagnetic Measurements , 1989 .

[29]  Glyn W. Humphreys,et al.  Visual marking inhibits singleton capture , 2003, Cognitive Psychology.

[30]  D M Wegner,et al.  Paradoxical effects of thought suppression. , 1987, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[31]  Clayton Hickey,et al.  Target resolution in visual search involves the direct suppression of distractors: evidence from electrophysiology. , 2012, Psychophysiology.

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

[33]  J. Wolfe,et al.  Guided Search 2.0 A revised model of visual search , 1994, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

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

[35]  S. Luck,et al.  Neural sources of focused attention in visual search. , 2000, Cerebral cortex.

[36]  Jessica Sänger,et al.  Visuo-spatial processing and the N1 component of the ERP. , 2009, Psychophysiology.

[37]  Anders Petersen,et al.  Attentional Capture by Salient Distractors during Visual Search Is Determined by Temporal Task Demands , 2012, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[38]  Martin Eimer,et al.  The N2pc component and its links to attention shifts and spatially selective visual processing. , 2008, Psychophysiology.

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

[40]  Glyn W. Humphreys,et al.  Visual marking: using time in visual selection , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[41]  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.

[42]  Rolf Verleger,et al.  Time-course of hemispheric preference for processing contralateral relevant shapes: P1pc, N1pc, N2pc, N3pc , 2012, Advances in cognitive psychology.

[43]  B. Motter Neural correlates of attentive selection for color or luminance in extrastriate area V4 , 1994, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[44]  S. Luck,et al.  Bridging the Gap between Monkey Neurophysiology and Human Perception: An Ambiguity Resolution Theory of Visual Selective Attention , 1997, Cognitive Psychology.

[45]  H J Müller,et al.  Visual search for singleton feature targets within and across feature dimensions , 1995, Perception & psychophysics.

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

[47]  G. Campana,et al.  Where perception meets memory: A review of repetition priming in visual search tasks , 2010, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[48]  Jeff Miller,et al.  Measurement of ERP latency differences: a comparison of single-participant and jackknife-based scoring methods. , 2008, Psychophysiology.

[49]  G. Humphreys,et al.  Visual marking: prioritizing selection for new objects by top-down attentional inhibition of old objects. , 1997, Psychological review.

[50]  G. Woodman,et al.  Do the contents of visual working memory automatically influence attentional selection during visual search? , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[51]  Hans-Jochen Heinze,et al.  Neural Mechanisms of Surround Attenuation and Distractor Competition in Visual Search , 2011, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[52]  Joseph Krummenacher,et al.  Dimension-based attention modulates feed-forward visual processing. , 2010, Acta psychologica.

[53]  Geoffrey F. Woodman,et al.  Electrophysiological measurement of rapid shifts of attention during visual search , 1999, Nature.

[54]  Rupert G. Miller The jackknife-a review , 1974 .

[55]  E. Wascher,et al.  Tuning perceptual competition. , 2010, Journal of neurophysiology.

[56]  Jeff Miller,et al.  Jackknife-based method for measuring LRP onset latency differences. , 1998, Psychophysiology.

[57]  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.

[58]  G. Humphreys,et al.  Inhibition and anticipation in visual search: Evidence from effects of color foreknowledge on preview search , 2003, Perception & psychophysics.

[59]  S J Luck,et al.  Spatial filtering during visual search: evidence from human electrophysiology. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[60]  Matthias M. Müller,et al.  Involuntary attentional orienting in the absence of awareness speeds up early sensory processing , 2016, Cortex.

[61]  Hans-Jochen Heinze,et al.  The Neural Site of Attention Matches the Spatial Scale of Perception , 2006, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[62]  Thomas Töllner,et al.  Top-down dimensional weight set determines the capture of visual attention: evidence from the PCN component. , 2012, Cerebral cortex.

[63]  Derrick G. Watson,et al.  Visual marking: Evidence for inhibition using a probe-dot detection paradigm , 2000, Perception & psychophysics.

[64]  H. Egeth,et al.  Overriding stimulus-driven attentional capture , 1994, Perception & psychophysics.

[65]  Glyn W. Humphreys,et al.  Color-based grouping and inhibition in visual search: Evidence from a probe detection analysis of preview search , 2005, Perception & psychophysics.