Cooperative and Opposing Effects of Strategic and Involuntary Attention

To assess whether working memory contents can effectively bias visual selection even when they do not represent the current target in the attention task, we recorded the ERP activity from participants performing both a memory task and, in the retention period, a visual search task. In this task, a distracter matching the memory content could be presented on the same side (congruent trials) or on the opposite side (incongruent trials) relative to the target location (Experiment 1 and Experiment 2). On some trials, only the matching distracter (but no target) was presented (catch trials, Experiment 2). Results showed that the N2pc component was modulated by the presence and location of a matching distracter. We interpret these results as evidence that the involuntary control exerted by the irrelevant memory contents coexists with the strategic mechanism related to the search target, influencing attention selection with roughly equal power. In Experiment 3, we found that the modulation of the N2pc is not strictly related to the active maintenance of the memory-target features but can also be elicited by repetition priming. Overall, these findings suggest that, together with the physical properties of the stimuli presented in the visual field, irrelevant memory contents represent a powerful class of factors that lead to involuntary attentional control.

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

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

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

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

[5]  Agnieszka Wykowska,et al.  On the Temporal Relation of Top–Down and Bottom–Up Mechanisms during Guidance of Attention , 2010, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[6]  E. Vogel,et al.  Interactions between attention and working memory , 2006, Neuroscience.

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

[8]  Paul E. Downing,et al.  Competition in visual working memory for control of search , 2003 .

[9]  Jeff Miller,et al.  Using the jackknife-based scoring method for measuring LRP onset effects in factorial designs. , 2001, Psychophysiology.

[10]  G. Humphreys,et al.  Automatic guidance of attention from working memory , 2008, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[11]  P. Downing,et al.  Interactions Between Visual Working Memory and Selective Attention , 2000, Psychological science.

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

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

[14]  Christian N L Olivers,et al.  Interactions between visual working memory and visual attention. , 2008, Frontiers in bioscience : a journal and virtual library.

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

[16]  C. Bundesen A theory of visual attention. , 1990, Psychological review.

[17]  Clayton Hickey,et al.  Priming resolves perceptual ambiguity in visual search: Evidence from behaviour and electrophysiology , 2010, Vision Research.

[18]  G. Humphreys,et al.  Dissociating the neural mechanisms of memory-based guidance of visual selection , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[19]  G. Humphreys,et al.  Early, involuntary top-down guidance of attention from working memory. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[20]  Martin Eimer,et al.  Priming of pop-out modulates attentional target selection in visual search: Behavioural and electrophysiological evidence , 2010, Vision Research.

[21]  J. Theeuwes,et al.  Feature-based memory-driven attentional capture: visual working memory content affects visual attention. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[22]  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.

[23]  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.

[24]  Alfonso Caramazza,et al.  Attention selection, distractor suppression and N2pc , 2009, Cortex.

[25]  H Pashler,et al.  Do images involuntarily trigger search? A test of Pillsbury’s hypothesis , 1999, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[26]  David Soto,et al.  Electrophysiological evidence for attentional guidance by the contents of working memory , 2009, The European journal of neuroscience.

[27]  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.

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

[29]  R Verleger,et al.  Lateralized human cortical activity for shifting visuospatial attention and initiating saccades. , 1998, Journal of neurophysiology.

[30]  T. Egner,et al.  Working memory as internal attention: Toward an integrative account of internal and external selection processes , 2012, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.

[31]  A. Caramazza,et al.  An electrophysiological assessment of distractor suppression in visual search tasks. , 2009, Psychophysiology.

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

[33]  J. Theeuwes,et al.  Electrophysiological Evidence of the Capture of Visual Attention , 2006, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

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

[35]  P. Roelfsema,et al.  The effect of items in working memory on the deployment of attention and the eyes during visual search. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[37]  Nicolas Robitaille,et al.  On the control of visual spatial attention: evidence from human electrophysiology , 2006, Psychological research.

[38]  Antje S. Meyer,et al.  Electrophysiological Evidence of Semantic Interference in Visual Search , 2010, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[39]  L. Chelazzi,et al.  Associative knowledge controls deployment of visual selective attention , 2003, Nature Neuroscience.

[40]  J. Duncan,et al.  Visual search and stimulus similarity. , 1989, Psychological review.