Environmental cancer in the Indian context

C. Murti

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00412443

Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Neural Suppression of Distractors Surrounding the Spotlight: Evidence from Steady-State Visual Evoked Potentials.

JunBang Zhao,ZhiJun Zhang,Chen Zhang,Yi Tang,ZhiFang Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11434-012-5078-2

2012-01-01

Chinese Science Bulletin

Abstract: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.
Proactive distractor suppression in early visual cortex

David Richter,Dirk van Moorselaar,Jan Theeuwes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.04.03.587747

2024-04-05

Abstract:Avoiding distraction by salient yet irrelevant stimuli is critical when accomplishing daily tasks. One possible mechanism to accomplish this is by suppressing stimuli that may be distracting such that they no longer compete for attention. While the behavioral benefits of distractor suppression are well-established, its neural underpinnings are not yet fully understood. In an fMRI study, we examined whether and how sensory responses in early visual areas show signs of distractor suppression after incidental learning of spatial statistical regularities. Participants were exposed to an additional singleton task where, unbeknownst to them, one location more frequently contained a salient distractor. We then analyzed whether visual responses in terms of fMRI BOLD were modulated by this distractor predictability. Our findings indicate that implicit spatial priors shape sensory processing even at the earliest stages of cortical visual processing, evident in early visual cortex as a suppression of stimuli at locations which frequently contained distracting information. Notably, while this suppression was spatially (receptive field) specific, it did extend to nearby neutral locations, and occurred regardless of whether the distractor, a nontarget item or the target was presented at this location, suggesting that suppression arises before stimulus identification. Crucially, we observed a similar pattern of spatially specific neural suppression even if search was only anticipated, but no search display was presented. Our results highlight proactive modulations in early visual cortex, where potential distractions are suppressed preemptively, before stimulus onset, based on learned expectations. Combined, our study underscores how the brain leverages implicitly learned prior knowledge to optimize sensory processing and attention allocation.

Neuroscience
Attentional suppression of dynamic versus static salient distractors

Owen J. Adams,Nicholas Gaspelin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-024-02903-9

2024-06-07

Attention Perception & Psychophysics

Abstract:Attention must be carefully controlled to avoid distraction by salient stimuli. The signal suppression hypothesis proposes that salient stimuli can be proactively suppressed to prevent distraction. Although this hypothesis has garnered much support, most previous studies have used one class of salient distractors: color singletons. It therefore remains unclear whether other kinds of salient distractors can also be suppressed. The current study directly compared suppression of a variety of salient stimuli using an attentional capture task that was adapted for eye tracking. The working hypothesis was that static salient stimuli (e.g., color singletons) would be easier to suppress than dynamic salient stimuli (e.g., motion singletons). The results showed that participants could ignore a wide variety of salient distractors. Importantly, suppression was weaker and slower to develop for dynamic salient stimuli than static salient stimuli. A final experiment revealed that adding a static salient feature to a dynamic motion distractor greatly improved suppression. Altogether, the results suggest that an underlying inhibitory process is applied to all kinds of salient distractors, but that suppression is more readily applied to static features than dynamic features.

psychology, experimental
Feature-based attentional control for distractor suppression

Sunghyun Kim,Yang Seok Cho

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-024-02858-x

2024-03-02

Attention Perception & Psychophysics

Abstract:To investigate whether attentional suppression is merely a byproduct of target facilitation or a result of independent mechanisms for distractor suppression, the present study examined whether attentional suppression takes place when target facilitation hardly occurs using a spatial cueing paradigm. Participants searched for target letters that were not red, i.e., a negative color. On each trial, a target color was randomly chosen among 12 colors to prevent establishing attentional control for target colors and to reduce intertrial priming for target colors. Immediately before a target display, a noninformative spatial cue was presented at one of the possible target locations. The cue was rendered in a negative color, which was to be ignored, to detect targets or the reference color, which was never presented for target and non-target letters. Experiment 1 showed that negative color cues captured attention less than reference color cues, suggesting feature-based attentional suppression. The suppression effect was replicated when the temporal interval between the onsets of the cue and target displays was reduced in Experiments 2 and 3, suggesting proactive suppression. Experiment 3 directly confirmed no attentional control settings for target colors and intertrial priming. These findings suggest that distractor features can guide attention at the pre-attentive stage when target features are not used to attend to targets.

psychology, experimental
Suppression on the basis of template for rejection is reactive: Evidence from human electrophysiology

Chao Pang,Yanzhang Chen,Yue Zhang,Weizhi Nan,Shimin Fu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-024-02873-y

2024-03-16

Attention Perception & Psychophysics

Abstract:According to most theories of attention, the selection of task-relevant visual information can be enhanced by holding them in visual working memory (VWM). However, there has been a long-standing debate concerning whether similar optimization can also be achieved for task-irrelevant information, known as a "template for rejection". The present study aimed to explore this issue by examining the consequence of cue distractors before visual search tasks. For this endeavor, we manipulated the display heterogeneity by using two distractor conditions, salient and non-salient, to explore the extent to which holding the distractor color in VWM might affect attentional selection. We measured the reaction times of participants while their EEG activity was recorded. The results showed that WM-matched distractors did not improve reaction times but rather slowed them down in both tasks. Event-related potential (ERP) results showed that the display heterogeneity had no modulatory effect on the degree of distractor suppression. Even in the salient distractor condition, the WM-matched distractor received no greater suppression. Furthermore, the WM-matched distractor but not the neutral distractor elicited an N2pc before the P D in salient distractor conditions. This suggests that the template for rejection operates reactively since suppression occurs after extra attentional processes to the distractor. Moreover, the presence of WM-matched distractors led to a reduction of P3b, indicating a competition between target processing and WM-matched distractor rejection. Our findings provide insights into the mechanisms underlying the optimization of attentional selection, and have implications for future studies aimed at understanding the role of VWM in cognition.

psychology, experimental
Reward Association Facilitates Distractor Suppression in Human Visual Search

Mengyuan Gong,Feitong Yang,Sheng Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ejn.13174

2016-01-01

Abstract:Although valuable objects are attractive in nature, people often encounter situations where they would prefer to avoid such distraction while focusing on the task goal. Contrary to the typical effect of attentional capture by a reward-associated item, we provide evidence for a facilitation effect derived from the active suppression of a high reward-associated stimulus when cuing its identity as distractor before the display of search arrays. Selection of the target is shown to be significantly faster when the distractors were in high reward-associated colour than those in low reward-associated or non-rewarded colours. This behavioural reward effect was associated with two neural signatures before the onset of the search display: the increased frontal theta oscillation and the strengthened top-down modulation from frontal to anterior temporal regions. The former suggests an enhanced working memory representation for the reward-associated stimulus and the increased need for cognitive control to override Pavlovian bias, whereas the latter indicates that the boost of inhibitory control is realized through a frontal top-down mechanism. These results suggest a mechanism in which the enhanced working memory representation of a reward-associated feature is integrated with task demands to modify attentional priority during active distractor suppression and benefit behavioural performance.
Salience effects on attentional selection are enabled by task relevance.

Yue Zhang,Nicholas Gaspelin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0001241

2024-10-19

Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance

Abstract:Attention is a limited resource that must be carefully controlled to prevent distraction. Much research has demonstrated that distraction can be prevented by proactively suppressing salient stimuli to prevent them from capturing attention. It has been suggested, however, that prior studies showing evidence of suppression may have used stimuli that were not truly salient. This claim has been difficult to test because there are currently no agreed-upon methods to demonstrate that an object is salient. The current study aims to help resolve this by introducing a new technique to test the role of salience in attentional capture. Low- and high-salience singletons were generated via a manipulation of color contrast. An initial experiment then verified the manipulation of salience using a search task where the color singleton was the target and could only be found via its bottom–up popout. High-salience singletons were found much more easily than low-salience singletons, suggesting that salience powerfully influenced attention when task relevant. A following experiment then used the same stimulus displays but adapted the task so that the singletons were task-irrelevant distractors. Both low- and high-salience singletons were suppressed, suggesting neither was able to capture attention. These results challenge purely stimulus-driven accounts by showing that improving salience only enhances attentional allocation in situations where the object is also task relevant. The results are instead consistent with the signal suppression hypothesis, which predicts that task-irrelevant singletons can be suppressed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)

psychology, experimental
Perceptual Competition Promotes Suppression of Reward Salience in Behavioral Selection and Neural Representation

Mengyuan Gong,Ke Jia,Sheng Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.0217-17.2017

2017-01-01

Abstract:Visual attentional selection is influenced by the value of objects. Previous studies have demonstrated that reward-associated items lead to rapid distraction and associated behavioral costs, which are difficult to override with top-down control. However, it has not been determined whether a perceptually competitive environment could render the reward-driven distraction more susceptible to top-down suppression. Here, we trained both genders of human subjects to associate two orientations with high and low magnitudes of reward. After training, we collected fMRI data while the subjects performed a categorical visual search task. The item in the reward-associated orientation served as the distractor, and the relative physical salience between the target and distractor was carefully controlled to modulate the degree of perceptual competition. The behavioral results showed faster searches in the presence of high, relative to low, reward-associated distractors. However, this effect was evident only if the physical salience of the distractor was higher than that of the target, indicating a context-dependent suppression effect of reward salience that relied on high perceptual competition. By analyzing the fMRI data in primary visual cortex, we found that the behavioral pattern of results could be predicted by the suppressed channel responses tuned to the reward-associated orientation in the distractor location, accompanied by increased responses in the midbrain dopaminergic region. Our results suggest that the learned salience of a reward plays a flexible role in solving perceptual competition, enabling the neural system to adaptively modulate the perceptual representation for behavioral optimization.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT The predictiveness principle in learning theory suggests that the stimulus with high predictability of reward receives priority in attentional selection. This selection bias leads to difficulties in changing approach behaviors, and thus becomes an important factor related to psychiatric disorders with attentional deficits. Here, we demonstrated that such principle is adaptively implemented in attentional suppression in visual search. We showed that the learned salience induced the suppression of the reward-associated distractor if its competition with the target was strong and could not be readily solved. This behavioral pattern was accompanied by increased midbrain fMRI activity and weakened sensory representation of the reward-associated distractor in V1. Our findings provided direct evidence that our brain flexibly uses learned regularities in attentional control.
Learned Low Priority of Attention after Training to Suppress Color Singleton Distractor

Huang Zhibang,Li Sheng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-022-02571-7

2022-01-01

Attention Perception & Psychophysics

Abstract:Allocating attention to significant events, such as a salient object, is effortless. Our brain is effective on this type of processing because doing so is generally beneficial for survival. However, a salient object could also be distracting and ignoring it costs a large amount of cognitive resource. In the present study, we conducted two behavioral experiments to investigate the effect of learned suppression of a salient color. Particularly, we were interested in the effect of learning in a new task context in which the previously suppressed color was task irrelevant. In Experiment 1, we trained the participants for five days with explicit instruction to suppress a color singleton distractor in a visual search task. We measured the effect of training with a dot probe task before and after the training. Colors in the dot probe task only served as the background and were not associated with the position of the target dot. However, we found that attention was involuntarily biased away from the previously suppressed color. In Experiment 2, the color singleton could either be the target or distractor in the visual search task, making the suppression of the color singleton inefficient for task performance. The results showed no training effect in the dot probe task after this manipulation. These findings provided direct evidence for the learned low priority of attention after training to suppress the color singleton distractor.
Distractor Inhibition in Visual Search Can Be Facilitated by Value Salience.

Mengyuan Gong,Sheng Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1167/15.12.453

2015-01-01

Journal of Vision

Abstract:Visual attention can be biased by value salience and cause maladaptive behaviors. Here we test whether the distractor with value salience can be effectively suppressed by selection of a target that categorically conflicts with it (i.e., steep vs. shallow in orientation). In Experiment 1, we trained observers to associate high and low reward with two steep bars (±30° from the vertical). Before and after the training, we tested the reward effect using a visual search task where steep was defined as the categorical feature of the target or distractor. The search display consisted of eight bars tilted to the same direction (left or right). The target (e.g., 30°) and distractor (e.g., 60°) bars were two singletons presented along the diagonal line, among six 45° tilted bars around the fixation. Observers were asked to look for the steep (and ignore the shallow) bar or look for the shallow (and ignore the steep) bar in separate blocks. The results showed significantly larger improvement in search RT for item associated with high reward than low reward (p< 0.05). Notably, this facilitation was evident when the reward-associated items were either to be detected (search for steep block) or ignored (search for shallow block), indicating the reward influences on target selection and distractor suppression, respectively. In Experiment 2, we confirmed that the suppression effect (p< 0.05) was unaffected by factors such as stimulus type (use Gabor pattern), presentation time, target-distractor distance (1 or 3 intervening items), and training category (associate the shallow with reward). These findings suggest that distractor inhibition in visual search can be facilitated by value salience. Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2015.
Dynamic suppression of likely distractor locations: Task-critical modulation

Fredrik Allenmark,Miloš Stanković,Hermann J. Müller,Zhuanghua Shi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2024.2393467

2024-08-26

Visual Cognition

Abstract:When a distractor frequently appears in a certain region of a search display, it interferes less with performance, reflecting learned distractor suppression. While this effect is well established, it remains unknown whether this suppression is ongoing (tonic) or deactivated upon task completion (phasic). To address this, the present eye-tracking study examined the time course of distractor suppression. Participants searched for and compared two targets to determine whether to make a response or withhold responding ("No-go" trials). The No-go trials allowed observation of post-decision suppression via eye movements. Response-critical target features either remained present for the whole trial (Experiment 1) or were removed halfway through (Experiment 2). In Experiment 1, distractors in the frequent region were substantially less likely to attract eye movements, including after inspection of both targets. However, in Experiment 2, the post-target distractor-region effect disappeared when the response-critical information was removed, indicating that suppression operates phasically and flexibly.

psychology, experimental
Separate Cue- and Alpha-Related Mechanisms for Distractor Suppression

Zach V. Redding,Ian C. Fiebelkorn

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.1444-23.2024

2024-06-20

Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract:Research on selective attention has largely focused on the enhancement of behaviorally important information, with less focus on the suppression of distracting information. Enhancement and suppression can operate through a push–pull relationship attributable to competitive interactions among neural populations. There has been considerable debate, however, regarding (1) whether suppression can be voluntarily deployed, independent of enhancement, and (2) whether voluntary deployment of suppression is associated with neural processes occurring prior to the distractor onset. Here, we investigated the interplay between pre- and post-distractor neural processes, while male and female human subjects performed a visual search task with a cue that indicated the location of an upcoming distractor. We utilized two established EEG markers of suppression: the distractor positivity (P D ) and alpha power (~8–15 Hz). The P D —a component of event-related potentials—has been linked with successful distractor suppression, and increased alpha power has been linked with attenuated sensory processing. Cueing the location of an upcoming distractor speeded responses and led to an earlier P D , consistent with earlier suppression due to strategic use of a spatial cue. In comparison, higher predistractor alpha power contralateral to distractors led to a later P D , consistent with later suppression. Lower alpha power contralateral to distractors instead led to distractor-related attentional capture. Lateralization of alpha power was not linked to the spatial cue. This observation, combined with differences in the timing of suppression—as indexed by earlier and later P D components—demonstrates that cue-related, voluntary suppression can occur separate from alpha-related gating of sensory processing.

neurosciences
How we learn to ignore singleton distractors: Suppressing saliency signals or specific features?

Isaac Savelson,Andrew B. Leber

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2024.2315797

2024-08-26

Visual Cognition

Abstract:Salient visual information can sometimes capture attention despite our goals. However, there are several ways we can minimize or eliminate such distraction. One such way is learned distractor rejection, in which we increasingly ignore salient, irrelevant distractors across repeated exposures. Here, we probe the mechanism underlying this learned rejection. What must be learned about the distractor to promote effective ignoring? Specifically, is feature rejection, alone, sufficient to ignore salient distractors, or do the items' saliency signals need to also be rejected? We used a modified version of the learned distractor rejection paradigm (Vatterott & Vecera, 2012) in which participants viewed training blocks containing either a salient singleton distractor or three non-salient "tripleton" distractors, followed by test blocks in which the distractor shared a feature (color) with the corresponding training blocks, but was always salient. Results revealed unexpected difficulties in replicating learned distractor rejection, suggesting the true effect size may be smaller than initially reported. With respect to our main objective, we found similar attenuation of singleton presence costs in the test blocks regardless of whether they followed singleton or tripleton training blocks. These results show that experience in rejecting saliency signals is not a requirement of learned distractor rejection.

psychology, experimental
Neural mechanisms for secondary suppression of emotional distractors: Evidence from concurrent electroencephalography-magnetoencephalography data

Xiaofei Dong,Lixia Cui,Blake W Johnson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001388

IF: 5.564

2024-07-18

Emotion

Abstract:Distractor suppression allows us to remain on-task in the presence of distractions by filtering task-irrelevant information from ongoing cognitive processing and responding. Electrophysiological studies have revealed that this key feature of selective attention is a dynamic process that involves at least two distinct stages of processing. Two important aspects of these processing stages remain unclear: Whether the processing of emotional distractors at an earlier stage is automatic, as reflected in the N2/early posterior negativity (EPN) component; and what functional-anatomical brain systems are recruited in each stage. The present study addresses these issues by measuring brain activity with concurrent electroencephalography-magnetoencephalography (MEG) recordings while participants performed a combined rapid serial visual presentation and motion tracking task. Event-related potentials (ERP) showed significant effects of attentional capture and attentional modulation during two time windows marked by the N2/EPN and P3b ERP components. Source reconstruction of concurrent MEG measurements revealed activation of the left visual association cortex and anterior cingulate cortex during the N2/EPN time window, activation of the insula during the early phase of the P3b and anterior cingulate cortex activity during the later phase of the P3b. The findings provide novel evidence establishing a connection between the increased N2 response to negative pictures and the activation of the cingulate gyrus, which facilitates the suppression of distractions during demanding cognitive tasks. In addition, distinct activation patterns were observed in the insula and anterior cingulate cortex during the P3b time window, indicating that attentional control mediated by the anterior cingulate cortex operates to suppress the processing of distracting emotional stimuli. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
Interference of Illusory Contour Perception by a Distractor

Junkai Yang,Lisen Sui,Hongyuan Wu,Qian Wu,Xiaolin Mei,Xiang Wu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.526972

IF: 3.8

2021-06-11

Frontiers in Psychology

Abstract:The visual system is capable of recognizing objects when object information is widely separated in space, as revealed by the Kanizsa-type illusory contours (ICs). Attentional involvement in perception of ICs is an important topic, and the present study examined whether and how the processing of ICs is interfered with by a distractor. Discrimination between thin and short deformations of an illusory circle was investigated in the absence or presence of a central dynamic patch, with difficulty of discrimination varied in three levels (easy, medium, and hard). Reaction time (RT) was significantly shorter in the absence compared to the presence of the distractor in the easy and medium conditions. Correct rate (CR) was significantly higher in the absence compared to the presence of the distractor in the easy condition, and the magnitude of the difference between CRs of distracted and non-distracted responses significantly reduced as task difficulty increased. These results suggested that perception of ICs is more likely to be vulnerable to distraction when more attentional resources remain available. The present finding supports that attention is engaged in perception of ICs and that distraction of IC processing is associated with perceptual load.

psychology, multidisciplinary
How does mind-wandering affect distractor suppression?

Han Zhang,Kevin F. Miller,John Jonides

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2024.2347605

2024-08-26

Visual Cognition

Abstract:The current study examined whether the suppression of overt attention to a salient distractor requires attentional resources. In a feature-search task, participants searched for a constant shape among different shapes while ignoring a uniquely coloured distractor. Trial-by-trial fluctuations in attentional resources were assessed via thought probes that elicited mind-wandering reports and via pre-trial pupil sizes. The results show that initial eye movements to the distractor were suppressed regardless of the availability of attentional resources. However, when mind-wandering, the presence of the distractor prolonged target looking time. Thus, the initial deployment of overt attention in this task does not require attentional resources and can proceed automatically, presumably due to strong selection history. Nonetheless, the distractor might still disrupt later processing stages, an effect exacerbated by mind-wandering. These results also suggest that initial eye movements do not fully reflect the extent of distractor interference during the entire course of visual search.

psychology, experimental
Pinging the Hidden Attentional Priority Map: Suppression Needs Attention

Changrun Huang,Dirk van Moorselaar,Joshua J. Foster,Mieke Donk,Jan Theeuwes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.04.17.589855

2024-04-21

Abstract:Attentional capture by an irrelevant salient distractor is attenuated when the distractor is presented more frequently in one location compared to other locations, suggesting that people learn to suppress an irrelevant salient location. However, to date it is unclear whether this suppression is proactive, applied before attention has been directed to the distractor location, or reactive, occurring after attention has been directed to that specific location. The aim of the present study is to investigate how suppression is accomplished by using the pinging technique which allows one to probe how attention is distributed across the visual field prior to the presentation of the search display. In an EEG experiment, participants performed a visual search task wherein they were tasked with identifying a shape singleton in the presence of an irrelevant color singleton. Compared to all other locations, this color singleton appeared more frequently at a specific location, which was termed the high-probability location. Prior to the search task, we introduced a continuous recall spatial memory task to reveal the hidden attentional priority map. Participants had to memorize the location of a memory cue continuously and report this location after the visual search task. Critically, after the presentation of the memory cue but before the onset of the search display, a neutral placeholder display was presented to probe how hidden priority map is reconfigured by the learned distractor suppression. Behaviorally, there was clear evidence that the high-probability location was suppressed, as search was more efficient when the distractor appeared at this location. To examine the priority map prior to search, we adopted an inverted encoding approach to reconstruct the tuning profile of the memorized position in the spatial memory task. Inverted modeling resulted in reliable tuning profiles during memory maintenance that gradually decayed and that were revived again by the onset of a neutral placeholder display preceding search. After the onset of the placeholders, the tuning profile observed was characterized by a spatial gradient centered over the high-probability location, with tuning being most pronounced at the-to-be suppressed location. This finding suggests that while learned suppression is initiated prior to search display onset, it is preceded by an initial phase of spatial selection, which is in line with a reactive suppression account. Together these results further our understanding of the mechanism of spatial distractor suppression.

Neuroscience
Memory Guidance in Distractor Suppression is Governed by the Availability of Cognitive Control

Wen,Yin Hou,Sheng Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-018-1511-1

2018-01-01

Abstract:Information stored in the memory systems can affect visual search. Previous studies have shown that holding the to-be-ignored features of distractors in working memory (WM) could accelerate target selection. However, such facilitation effect was only observed when the cued to-be-ignored features remained unchanged within an experimental block (i.e., the fixed cue condition). No search benefit was obtained if the to-be-ignored features varied from trial to trial (i.e., the varied cue condition). In the present study, we conducted three behavioral experiments to investigate whether the WM and long-term memory (LTM) representations of the to-be-ignored features could facilitate visual search in the fixed cue (Experiment 1) and varied cue (Experiments 2 and 3) conditions. Given the importance of the processing time of cognitive control in distractor suppression, we divided visual search trials into five quintiles based on their reaction times (RTs) and examined the temporal characteristics of the suppression effect. Results showed that both the WM and LTM representations of the to-be-ignored features could facilitate distractor suppression in the fixed cue condition, and the facilitation effects were evident across the quintiles in the RT distribution. However, in the varied cue condition, the RT benefits of the WM-matched distractors occurred only in the trials with the longest RTs, whereas no advantage of the LTM-matched distractors was observed. These results suggest that the effective WM-guided distractor suppression depends on the availability of cognitive control and the LTM-guided suppression occurs only if sufficient WM resource is accessible by LTM reactivation.
Testing the contributions of proactive target and distractor templates in visual search performance

Matt Oxner,Norman Forschack,Matthias M. Müller

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2024.2344724

2024-08-26

Visual Cognition

Abstract:When searching for objects with particular visual features, performance is sometimes improved by the presence of a salient colour distractor, such as a red item among green objects. Attention to such distractors is thought to be suppressed when the visual system expects their specific features (e.g., redness), but a complication with this view is that distractor expectancies are generally accompanied by anticipated target features, with their own associated attentional facilitation. We tested the role of these mechanisms by separately manipulating the colour specificity of salient distractors and of targets, and thus the ability to build up feature-specific templates for each type of search item. Experiment 1 employed singleton distractors appearing in unpredictable colours, preventing the formation of a feature-specific suppression template. Nevertheless, evidence of suppression was unchanged, suggesting that it does not require a fixed, predictable distractor. In Experiment 2, the singleton colour remained fixed while the target colour varied. Without a constant target colour, markers of singleton suppression were effectively abolished. The pattern of results suggests that observed suppression effects are largely driven by global enhancement of the expected target colour, possibly in combination with a second-order suppression mechanism that is not dependent on specific distractor features.

psychology, experimental
Learning to resist distraction by spatially predictable luminance transients and color singletons: same or different mechanisms?

Matteo Valsecchi,Massimo Turatto

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2024.2315811

2024-08-26

Visual Cognition

Abstract:Stimuli that appear abruptly in the visual field or differ from the surrounding stimuli based on a given visual feature can capture attention and interfere with the visual search process if they are not targets. When both types of distractors appear with higher likelihood at a given location, observers can learn to reduce their impact (distractor-location effect). In the case of feature-singleton distractors, this can imply a cost for processing targets that appear at locations associated with a high distractor probability (target-location effect). This has been proposed as evidence that distractor interference originates in the competition between distractors and targets within an attentional map, whose inputs can be modified by experience. In this study, we conduct a series of experiments that confirmed previous finding related to feature-singleton distractors, but consistently showed that learning to predict the spatial occurrence of luminance transients induces a distractor-location effect in the absence of a target-location effect. Combining this finding with the fact that interference by luminance transients were larger when distractors were far from the target position, we suggest that different mechanisms are responsible for the reduction of distractor interference in the case of color singletons and luminance transients.

psychology, experimental

Environmental cancer in the Indian context

Neural Suppression of Distractors Surrounding the Spotlight: Evidence from Steady-State Visual Evoked Potentials.

Proactive distractor suppression in early visual cortex

Attentional suppression of dynamic versus static salient distractors

Feature-based attentional control for distractor suppression

Suppression on the basis of template for rejection is reactive: Evidence from human electrophysiology

Reward Association Facilitates Distractor Suppression in Human Visual Search

Salience effects on attentional selection are enabled by task relevance.

Perceptual Competition Promotes Suppression of Reward Salience in Behavioral Selection and Neural Representation

Learned Low Priority of Attention after Training to Suppress Color Singleton Distractor

Distractor Inhibition in Visual Search Can Be Facilitated by Value Salience.

Dynamic suppression of likely distractor locations: Task-critical modulation

Separate Cue- and Alpha-Related Mechanisms for Distractor Suppression

How we learn to ignore singleton distractors: Suppressing saliency signals or specific features?

Neural mechanisms for secondary suppression of emotional distractors: Evidence from concurrent electroencephalography-magnetoencephalography data

Interference of Illusory Contour Perception by a Distractor

How does mind-wandering affect distractor suppression?

Pinging the Hidden Attentional Priority Map: Suppression Needs Attention

Memory Guidance in Distractor Suppression is Governed by the Availability of Cognitive Control

Testing the contributions of proactive target and distractor templates in visual search performance

Learning to resist distraction by spatially predictable luminance transients and color singletons: same or different mechanisms?