From Capture to Inhibition: How does Irrelevant Information Influence Visual Search? Evidence from a Spatial Cuing Paradigm

Even though information is spatially and temporally irrelevant, it can influence the processing of subsequent information. The present study used a spatial cuing paradigm to investigate the origins of this persisting influence by means of event-related potentials (ERPs) of the EEG. An irrelevant color cue that was either contingent (color search) or non-contingent (shape search) on attentional sets was presented prior to a target array with different stimulus-onset asynchronies (SOA; 200, 400, 800 ms). Behavioral results indicated that color cues captured attention only when they shared target-defining properties. These same-location effects persisted over time but were pronounced when cue and target array were presented in close succession. N2 posterior contralateral (N2pc) showed that the color cue generally drew attention, but was strongest in the contingent condition. A subsequently emerging contralateral posterior positivity referred to the irrelevant cue (i.e., distractor positivity, Pd) was unaffected by the attentional set and therefore interpreted as an inhibitory process required to enable a re-direction of the attentional focus. Contralateral delay activity (CDA) was only observable in the contingent condition, indicating the transfer of spatial information into working memory and thus providing an explanation for the same-location effect for longer SOAs. Inhibition of this irrelevant information was reflected by a second contralateral positivity triggered through target presentation. The results suggest that distracting information is actively maintained when it resembles a sought-after object. However, two independent attentional processes are at work to compensate for attentional distraction: the timely inhibition of attentional capture and the active inhibition of mental representation of irrelevant information.

[1]  Hsin-I Liao,et al.  Capturing attention is not that simple: Different mechanisms for stimulus-driven and contingent capture , 2013, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[2]  Steven J. Luck,et al.  ERPLAB: an open-source toolbox for the analysis of event-related potentials , 2014, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[3]  Edmund Wascher,et al.  Mechanisms of target localization in visual change detection: An interplay of gating and filtering , 2013, Behavioural Brain Research.

[4]  H. Müller,et al.  Selective manipulation of target identification demands in visual search: the role of stimulus contrast in CDA activations. , 2013, Journal of vision.

[5]  A Baddeley,et al.  The fractionation of working memory. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[6]  石原 忍.  Ishihara's tests for colour-blindness , 1966 .

[7]  Elena Amenedo,et al.  Feature processing during visual search in normal aging: Electrophysiological evidence , 2008, Neurobiology of Aging.

[8]  Pierre Jolicoeur,et al.  Tracking the Location of Visuospatial Attention in a Contingent Capture Paradigm , 2008, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[9]  Klaus Gramann,et al.  Dimension-based attention modulates early visual processing. , 2010, Psychophysiology.

[10]  E. Donchin,et al.  Detecting early communication: Using measures of movement-related potentials to illuminate human information processing , 1988, Biological Psychology.

[11]  Sven Hoffmann,et al.  Sustained posterior contralateral activity indicates re-entrant target processing in visual change detection: an EEG study , 2014, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[12]  Dominique Lamy,et al.  Attentional capture in singleton-detection and feature-search modes. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[14]  Benoit Brisson,et al.  Dissociation of the N2pc and sustained posterior contralateral negativity in a choice response task , 2008, Brain Research.

[15]  H. Müller,et al.  Neural correlates of age-related decline and compensation in visual attention capacity , 2014, Neurobiology of Aging.

[16]  Edmund Wascher,et al.  On the fate of non-cued mental representations in visuo-spatial working memory: Evidence by a retro-cuing paradigm , 2015, Behavioural Brain Research.

[17]  Jane E. Raymond,et al.  How Attention Changes in Response to Incentives , 2015, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[18]  M. D’Esposito.  Working memory. , 2008, Handbook of clinical neurology.

[19]  Steven J. Luck,et al.  The speed of visual attention in schizophrenia: Electrophysiological and behavioral evidence , 2006, Schizophrenia Research.

[20]  Eric Ruthruff,et al.  Contingent attentional capture by top-down control settings: converging evidence from event-related potentials. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[21]  G. Mangun,et al.  Electrophysiological signs of sustained and transient attention to spatial locations , 1995, Neuropsychologia.

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

[23]  Charles L. Folk,et al.  A Dissociation Between Attention and Selection , 2001, Psychological science.

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

[25]  H. Möller,et al.  The Speed of Visual Attention and Motor-Response Decisions in Adult Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder , 2015, Biological Psychiatry.

[26]  Maro G. Machizawa,et al.  Neural activity predicts individual differences in visual working memory capacity , 2004, Nature.

[27]  Steven J Luck,et al.  Active suppression after involuntary capture of attention , 2012, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.

[28]  E. Ruthruff,et al.  Aging and Involuntary Attention Capture: Electrophysiological Evidence for Preserved Attentional Control with Advanced Age Involuntary Attention Capture Aging and Involuntary Attention Capture the Present Study Experiment 1 Table 1 , 2022 .

[29]  E. Vogel,et al.  Contralateral delay activity provides a neural measure of the number of representations in visual working memory. , 2010, Journal of neurophysiology.

[30]  Martin Eimer,et al.  Top-down task sets for combined features: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence for two stages in attentional object selection , 2013, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[31]  D. Kerzel,et al.  Effects of relevant and irrelevant color singletons on inhibition of return and attentional capture , 2013, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

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

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

[34]  E Wascher,et al.  The interaction of stimulus- and response-related processes measured by event-related lateralizations of the EEG. , 1996, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[35]  C. Folk,et al.  Target-uncertainty effects in attentional capture: Color-singleton set or multiple attentional control settings? , 2010, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[36]  Christian Beste,et al.  On the time course of bottom-up and top-down processes in selective visual attention: an EEG study. , 2012, Psychophysiology.

[37]  R. T. Pivik,et al.  Guidelines for the recording and quantitative analysis of electroencephalographic activity in research contexts. , 1993, Psychophysiology.

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

[39]  J. Reynolds,et al.  Attentional modulation of visual processing. , 2004, Annual review of neuroscience.

[40]  John H. R. Maunsell,et al.  Attentional modulation of visual motion processing in cortical areas MT and MST , 1996, Nature.

[41]  E. Wascher,et al.  The time course of visuo-spatial working memory updating revealed by a retro-cuing paradigm , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[42]  R W Remington,et al.  The structure of attentional control: contingent attentional capture by apparent motion, abrupt onset, and color. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[43]  J. Theeuwes,et al.  On the time course of top-down and bottom-up control of visual attention , 2000 .

[44]  Arnaud Delorme,et al.  EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis , 2004, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[45]  J. Theeuwes.  Top-down and bottom-up control of visual selection. , 2010, Acta psychologica.

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

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

[48]  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.

[49]  Charles L. Folk,et al.  Contingent attentional capture or delayed allocation of attention? , 2001, Perception & psychophysics.

[50]  F. Hamker,et al.  Patients with Parkinson׳s disease are less affected than healthy persons by relevant response-unrelated features in visual search , 2014, Neuropsychologia.

[51]  B. Gibson,et al.  Inhibition of return and attentional control settings , 2000, Perception & psychophysics.

[52]  J. C. Johnston,et al.  Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[53]  H. Müller,et al.  Top-down weighting of visual dimensions: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence , 2010, Vision Research.

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

[55]  A. Mognon,et al.  ADJUST: An automatic EEG artifact detector based on the joint use of spatial and temporal features. , 2011, Psychophysiology.

[56]  Carlo Umiltà,et al.  Attentional selection and identification of visual objects are reflected by distinct electrophysiological responses , 2007, Experimental Brain Research.

[57]  Stefanie I Becker,et al.  Capture by colour: Evidence for dimension-specific singleton capture , 2015, Attention, perception & psychophysics.