Literature DB >> 25447061

Oddball distractors demand attention: neural and behavioral responses to predictability in the flanker task.

Abigail Noyce1, Robert Sekuler2.   

Abstract

Predictable and unpredictable distractors may differentially affect attention. We adapted the Eriksen flanker task by manipulating the probability with which specific flankers occurred. Subjects reported the orientation of briefly-presented targets while attempting to ignore four flanking items. Flankers had either standard (90% of trials) or oddball (10%) orientations. Congruent and incongruent configurations were equiprobable, as were target orientations. Oddball flanker orientations substantially enhanced congruency effects: performance was best when the target was congruent with oddball flankers and worst when it was incongruent. We recorded scalp EEG while subjects performed the task, and later computed ERPs timelocked to stimulus onset. Oddball flanker orientations evoked a visual mismatch negativity (vMMN). Subjects' temperament predicted individual differences in vMMN magnitude. Orientation sensitivity predicted larger vMMNs; attentional selectivity predicted smaller. Behavioral and vMMN results indicate that subjects exploit distractor predictability to support more-effective active inhibition; oddballs disrupt this strategy. Despite subjects' attempts to ignore the flankers, unexpected distractors strongly influence neural responses and behavioral performance.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Expectation; Flankers task; Individual difference; MMN; Temperament; vMMN

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25447061      PMCID: PMC4695971          DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.10.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuropsychologia        ISSN: 0028-3932            Impact factor:   3.139


  28 in total

1.  Conflict adaptation effects in the absence of executive control.

Authors:  Ulrich Mayr; Edward Awh; Paul Laurey
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 24.884

Review 2.  MMN in the visual modality: a review.

Authors:  P Pazo-Alvarez; F Cadaveira; E Amenedo
Journal:  Biol Psychol       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 3.251

Review 3.  The mismatch negativity (MMN) in basic research of central auditory processing: a review.

Authors:  R Näätänen; P Paavilainen; T Rinne; K Alho
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2007-10-10       Impact factor: 3.708

4.  Attention and mismatch negativity.

Authors:  R Näätänen; P Paavilainen; H Tiitinen; D Jiang; K Alho
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  1993-09       Impact factor: 4.016

5.  Orienting of attention.

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

6.  Cross-modal distraction by deviance: functional similarities between the auditory and tactile modalities.

Authors:  Jessica K Ljungberg; Fabrice B R Parmentier
Journal:  Exp Psychol       Date:  2012

7.  Errors are aversive: defensive motivation and the error-related negativity.

Authors:  Greg Hajcak; Dan Foti
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2008-02

8.  Biology, context, and developmental inquiry.

Authors:  Jerome Kagan
Journal:  Annu Rev Psychol       Date:  2002-06-10       Impact factor: 24.137

9.  Expectations modulate the magnitude of attentional capture by auditory events.

Authors:  Anatole Nöstl; John E Marsh; Patrik Sörqvist
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-11-07       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  FieldTrip: Open source software for advanced analysis of MEG, EEG, and invasive electrophysiological data.

Authors:  Robert Oostenveld; Pascal Fries; Eric Maris; Jan-Mathijs Schoffelen
Journal:  Comput Intell Neurosci       Date:  2010-12-23
View more
  3 in total

1.  Characterizing the roles of alpha and theta oscillations in multisensory attention.

Authors:  Arielle S Keller; Lisa Payne; Robert Sekuler
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 3.139

2.  Distractor probabilities modulate flanker task performance.

Authors:  Eli Bulger; Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham; Abigail L Noyce
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2020-11-01       Impact factor: 2.199

3.  Perceptual and cognitive processes in augmented reality - comparison between binocular and monocular presentations.

Authors:  Akihiko Dempo; Tsukasa Kimura; Kazumitsu Shinohara
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2021-08-23       Impact factor: 2.199

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.