On the fate of distractor representations.

Research on the topic of distractor inhibition has used different empirical approaches to study how the human mind selects relevant information from the environment, and the results are controversially discussed. One key question that typically arises is how selection deals with the irrelevant information. We used a new selection task, in which participants sometimes had to respond to the distractors instead of the target. Importantly, we varied the time interval between stimuli onset and the cue that signaled participants to respond to the distractors. We analyzed RTs and error rates from responses to distractors as a function of how long the target had been processed (and the distractor ignored) before the cue required a response to the distractor (i.e., stimulus-cue SOA). The data are compatible with selection models assuming that distractor stimuli are initially activated and then deactivated. Thus, we argue for selection models assuming top down deactivation of distractor representations that work in parallel with top down activation of target representations.

[1]  A. Allport,et al.  Selection for action: Some behavioral and neurophysiological considerations of attention and action , 1987 .

[2]  Jochen Musch,et al.  Affective priming: Findings and theories. , 2003 .

[3]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance , 2004 .

[4]  Michael D. Dodd,et al.  In Opposition to Inhibition , 2003 .

[5]  C. Spence,et al.  Increased perceptual and conceptual processing difficulty makes the immeasurable measurable: negative priming in the absence of probe distractors. , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[6]  J. Michael Herrmann,et al.  A computational approach to negative priming , 2007, Connect. Sci..

[7]  Thomas H. Carr,et al.  Inhibitory processes in perceptual recognition: Evidence for a Center-Surround Attentional Mechanism , 1994 .

[8]  Andrea M Philipp,et al.  Control and interference in task switching--a review. , 2010, Psychological bulletin.

[9]  H. Heuer,et al.  Perspectives on Perception and Action , 1989 .

[10]  P. Wühr,et al.  A case for inhibition: visual attention suppresses the processing of irrelevant objects. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[11]  O. Neumann Beyond capacity: A functional view of attention , 1987 .

[12]  K. C. Klauer,et al.  The Psychology of Evaluation : Affective Processes in Cognition and Emotion , 2003 .

[13]  H. Pashler The Psychology of Attention , 1997 .

[14]  S. Tipper,et al.  Inhibitory Mechanisms of Neural and Cognitive Control: Applications to Selective Attention and Sequential Action , 1996, Brain and Cognition.

[15]  John W. Tukey,et al.  Exploratory Data Analysis. , 1979 .

[16]  R. H. Phaf,et al.  SLAM: A connectionist model for attention in visual selection tasks , 1990, Cognitive Psychology.

[17]  L. Shaffer CHOICE REACTION WITH VARIABLE S-R MAPPING. , 1965, Journal of experimental psychology.

[18]  G. Logan,et al.  On the Use of a Concurrent Memory Load to Measure Attention and Automaticity , 1979 .

[19]  A. Buchner,et al.  Negative Priming as a Memory Phenomenon , 2007 .

[20]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task , 1974 .

[21]  S. Tipper Does Negative Priming Reflect Inhibitory Mechanisms? A Review and Integration of Conflicting Views , 2001, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[22]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Coactivation in the perception of redundant targets. , 1990, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance.

[23]  Colin M. Macleod,et al.  Inhibition in Cognition , 2007 .

[24]  L H Shaffer,et al.  Some effects of partial advance information on choice reaction with fixed or variable S-R mapping. , 1966, Journal of experimental psychology.

[25]  G. Logan On the ability to inhibit thought and action , 1984 .

[26]  S. Tipper,et al.  A model of inhibitory mechanisms in selective attention. , 1994 .

[27]  T. Carr,et al.  Inhibitory Processes in Attention, Memory and Language , 1994 .

[28]  J. H. Neely Semantic priming and retrieval from lexical memory: Roles of inhibitionless spreading activation and limited-capacity attention. , 1977 .

[29]  A. Miyake,et al.  The relations among inhibition and interference control functions: a latent-variable analysis. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[30]  James L. McClelland,et al.  On the control of automatic processes: a parallel distributed processing account of the Stroop effect. , 1990, Psychological review.

[31]  W. Trammell Neill,et al.  Episodic retrieval in negative priming and repetition priming. , 1997 .

[32]  Shaffer Lh CHOICE REACTION WITH VARIABLE S-R MAPPING. , 1965 .

[33]  S. Tipper The Negative Priming Effect: Inhibitory Priming by Ignored Objects , 1985, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[34]  Shaffer Lh,et al.  Some effects of partial advance information on choice reaction with fixed or variable S-R mapping. , 1966 .