Literature DB >> 22053147

Active suppression of distractors that match the contents of visual working memory.

Risa Sawaki1, Steven J Luck.   

Abstract

The biased competition theory proposes that items matching the contents of visual working memory will automatically have an advantage in the competition for attention. However, evidence for an automatic effect has been mixed, perhaps because the memory-driven attentional bias can be overcome by top-down suppression. To test this hypothesis, the Pd component of the event-related potential waveform was used as a marker of attentional suppression. While observers maintained a color in working memory, task-irrelevant probe arrays were presented that contained an item matching the color being held in memory. We found that the memory-matching probe elicited a Pd component, indicating that it was being actively suppressed. This result suggests that sensory inputs matching the information being held in visual working memory are automatically detected and generate an "attend-to-me" signal, but this signal can be overridden by an active suppression mechanism to prevent the actual capture of attention.

Entities:  

Year:  2011        PMID: 22053147      PMCID: PMC3204803          DOI: 10.1080/13506285.2011.603709

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vis cogn        ISSN: 1350-6285


  61 in total

1.  Electrophysiological measurement of rapid shifts of attention during visual search.

Authors:  G F Woodman; S J Luck
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1999-08-26       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 2.  Top-down and bottom-up control of visual selection.

Authors:  Jan Theeuwes
Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)       Date:  2010-05-26

Review 3.  Distracted and confused?: selective attention under load.

Authors:  Nilli Lavie
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 20.229

4.  The effect of items in working memory on the deployment of attention and the eyes during visual search.

Authors:  R Houtkamp; P R Roelfsema
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 3.332

5.  Automatic selection of irrelevant object features through working memory: evidence for top-down attentional capture.

Authors:  David Soto; Glyn W Humphreys
Journal:  Exp Psychol       Date:  2009

6.  Attentional inhibition of visual processing in human striate and extrastriate cortex.

Authors:  Scott D Slotnick; Jens Schwarzbach; Steven Yantis
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 6.556

7.  Responses of neurons in inferior temporal cortex during memory-guided visual search.

Authors:  L Chelazzi; J Duncan; E K Miller; R Desimone
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  Visual attention mediated by biased competition in extrastriate visual cortex.

Authors:  R Desimone
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  1998-08-29       Impact factor: 6.237

9.  What drives memory-driven attentional capture? The effects of memory type, display type, and search type.

Authors:  Christian N L Olivers
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 3.332

10.  Attentional preparation for a lateralized visual distractor: behavioral and fMRI evidence.

Authors:  Christian C Ruff; Jon Driver
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 3.225

View more
  39 in total

1.  Experience-dependent attentional tuning of distractor rejection.

Authors:  Daniel B Vatterott; Shaun P Vecera
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2012-10

2.  Perturbing Neural Representations of Working Memory with Task-irrelevant Interruption.

Authors:  Nicole Hakim; Tobias Feldmann-Wüstefeld; Edward Awh; Edward K Vogel
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2019-10-16       Impact factor: 3.225

3.  Visual short-term memory guides infants' visual attention.

Authors:  Samantha G Mitsven; Lisa M Cantrell; Steven J Luck; Lisa M Oakes
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2018-04-25

4.  Gaze dynamics of feature-based distractor inhibition under prior-knowledge and expectations.

Authors:  Wen Wen; Yangming Zhang; Sheng Li
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2021-04-26       Impact factor: 2.199

5.  Gestalt grouping cues can improve filtering performance in visual working memory.

Authors:  Ayala S Allon; Gili Vixman; Roy Luria
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2018-05-29

6.  Neural measures reveal a fixed item limit in subitizing.

Authors:  Edward F Ester; Trafton Drew; Daniel Klee; Edward K Vogel; Edward Awh
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2012-05-23       Impact factor: 6.167

7.  Working memory contents enhance perception under stimulus-driven competition.

Authors:  Suk Won Han
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2015-04

8.  Diminished distractor exclusion for magnocellular features near the hand.

Authors:  Tony Thomas; Meera Mary Sunny
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2020-02-24       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Active suppression after involuntary capture of attention.

Authors:  Risa Sawaki; Steven J Luck
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2013-04

10.  Quantifying the Attentional Impact of Working Memory Matching Targets and Distractors.

Authors:  Nancy B Carlisle; Geoffrey F Woodman
Journal:  Vis cogn       Date:  2019-06-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.