Literature DB >> 23254574

Active suppression after involuntary capture of attention.

Risa Sawaki1, Steven J Luck.   

Abstract

After attention has been involuntarily captured by a distractor, how is it reoriented toward a target? One possibility is that attention to the distractor passively fades over time, allowing the target to become attended. Another possibility is that the captured location is actively suppressed so that attention can be directed toward the target location. The present study investigated this issue with event-related potentials (ERPs), focusing on the N2pc component (a neural measure of attentional deployment) and the Pd component (a neural measure of attentional suppression). Observers identified a color-defined target in a search array, which was preceded by a task-irrelevant cue array. When the cue array contained an item that matched the target color, this item captured attention (as measured both behaviorally and with the N2pc component). This capture of attention was followed by active suppression (indexed by the Pd component), and this was then followed by a reorienting of attention toward the target in the search array (indexed by the N2pc component). These findings indicate that the involuntary capture of attention by a distractor is followed by an active suppression process that presumably facilitates the subsequent voluntary orienting of attention to the target.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23254574      PMCID: PMC3845459          DOI: 10.3758/s13423-012-0353-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev        ISSN: 1069-9384


  24 in total

1.  Using the jackknife-based scoring method for measuring LRP onset effects in factorial designs.

Authors:  R Ulrich; J Miller
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 4.016

2.  Attentional capture in singleton-detection and feature-search modes.

Authors:  Dominique Lamy; Howard E Egeth
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 3.332

3.  The involvement of bottom-up saliency processing in endogenous inhibition of return.

Authors:  David Henderickx; Kathleen Maetens; Eric Soetens
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 2.199

4.  Effects of task relevance and stimulus-driven salience in feature-search mode.

Authors:  Dominique Lamy; Andrew Leber; Howard E Egeth
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 3.332

5.  Measurement of ERP latency differences: a comparison of single-participant and jackknife-based scoring methods.

Authors:  Andrea Kiesel; Jeff Miller; Pierre Jolicoeur; Benoit Brisson
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2007-11-07       Impact factor: 4.016

6.  Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs.

Authors:  G R Loftus; M E Masson
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1994-12

7.  Attentional capture by salient distractors during visual search is determined by temporal task demands.

Authors:  Monika Kiss; Anna Grubert; Anders Petersen; Martin Eimer
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2011-08-23       Impact factor: 3.225

8.  Spatial filtering during visual search: evidence from human electrophysiology.

Authors:  S J Luck; S A Hillyard
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 3.332

9.  Electrophysiological correlates of feature analysis during visual search.

Authors:  S J Luck; S A Hillyard
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 4.016

10.  Orienting of attention.

Authors:  M I Posner
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol       Date:  1980-02       Impact factor: 2.143

View more
  20 in total

1.  How Attention Changes in Response to Incentives.

Authors:  Risa Sawaki; Steven J Luck; Jane E Raymond
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2015-07-07       Impact factor: 3.225

2.  Spatially Guided Distractor Suppression during Visual Search.

Authors:  Tobias Feldmann-Wüstefeld; Marina Weinberger; Edward Awh
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2021-03-02       Impact factor: 6.167

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

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

4.  Neural Evidence for the Contribution of Active Suppression During Working Memory Filtering.

Authors:  Tobias Feldmann-Wüstefeld; Edward K Vogel
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2019-02-01       Impact factor: 5.357

5.  Hyperfocusing of attention on goal-related information in schizophrenia: Evidence from electrophysiology.

Authors:  Risa Sawaki; Johanna Kreither; Carly J Leonard; Samuel T Kaiser; Britta Hahn; James M Gold; Steven J Luck
Journal:  J Abnorm Psychol       Date:  2016-10-06

6.  Value-driven attentional capture is modulated by the contents of working memory: An EEG study.

Authors:  T Hinault; K J Blacker; M Gormley; B A Anderson; S M Courtney
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 3.282

Review 7.  The Role of Inhibition in Avoiding Distraction by Salient Stimuli.

Authors:  Nicholas Gaspelin; Steven J Luck
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2017-11-27       Impact factor: 20.229

8.  Electrophysiological measurement of information flow during visual search.

Authors:  Joshua D Cosman; Jason T Arita; Julianna D Ianni; Geoffrey F Woodman
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2015-12-16       Impact factor: 4.016

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

Authors:  Christine Mertes; Edmund Wascher; Daniel Schneider
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2016-05-20       Impact factor: 3.169

10.  Nogo Stimuli Do Not Receive More Attentional Suppression or Response Inhibition than Neutral Stimuli: Evidence from the N2pc, PD, and N2 Components in a Spatial Cueing Paradigm.

Authors:  Caroline Barras; Dirk Kerzel
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2016-05-02
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.