Literature DB >> 26865606

Distinct Mechanisms for Distractor Suppression and Target Facilitation.

MaryAnn P Noonan1, Nika Adamian2, Alexandra Pike3, Frida Printzlau3, Ben M Crittenden4, Mark G Stokes4.   

Abstract

It is well established that preparatory attention improves processing of task-relevant stimuli. Although it is often more important to ignore task-irrelevant stimuli, comparatively little is known about preparatory attentional mechanisms for inhibiting expected distractions. Here, we establish that distractor inhibition is not under the same top-down control as target facilitation. Using a variant of the Posner paradigm, participants were cued to either the location of a target stimulus, the location of a distractor, or were provided no predictive information. In Experiment 1, we found that participants were able to use target-relevant cues to facilitate target processing in both blocked and flexible conditions, but distractor cueing was only effective in the blocked version of the task. In Experiment 2, we replicate these findings in a larger sample and leveraged the additional statistical power to perform individual differences analyses to tease apart potential underlying mechanisms. We found no evidence for a correlation between these two types of benefit, suggesting that flexible target cueing and distractor suppression depend on distinct cognitive mechanisms. In Experiment 3, we use EEG to show that preparatory distractor suppression is associated with a diminished P1, but we found no evidence to suggest that this effect was mediated by top-down control of oscillatory activity in the alpha band (8-12 Hz). We conclude that flexible top-down mechanisms of cognitive control are specialized for target-related attention, whereas distractor suppression only emerges when the predictive information can be derived directly from experience. This is consistent with a predictive coding model of expectation suppression. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: If you were told to ignore a white bear, you might find it quite difficult. Holding something in working memory is thought to automatically facilitate feature processing, even if doing so is detrimental to the current task. Despite this paradox, it is often assumed that distractor suppression is controlled via similar top-down mechanisms of attention that prepare brain areas for target enhancement. In particular, low-frequency oscillations in visual cortex appear especially well suited for gating task-irrelevant information. We describe the results of a series of studies exploring distractor suppression and challenge this popular notion. We draw on behavioral and EEG evidence to show that selective distractor suppression operates via an alternative mechanism, such as expectation suppression within a predictive coding framework.
Copyright © 2016 the authors 0270-6474/16/361797-11$15.00/0.

Entities:  

Keywords:  alpha; attention; distractor inhibition; expectation suppression; prediction

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26865606      PMCID: PMC4748069          DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2133-15.2016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosci        ISSN: 0270-6474            Impact factor:   6.167


  51 in total

1.  Covert visual spatial orienting and saccades: overlapping neural systems.

Authors:  A C Nobre; D R Gitelman; E C Dias; M M Mesulam
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 6.556

Review 2.  The free-energy principle: a unified brain theory?

Authors:  Karl Friston
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2010-01-13       Impact factor: 34.870

3.  The Psychophysics Toolbox.

Authors:  D H Brainard
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  1997

4.  Less is more: expectation sharpens representations in the primary visual cortex.

Authors:  Peter Kok; Janneke F M Jehee; Floris P de Lange
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2012-07-26       Impact factor: 17.173

Review 5.  Top-down modulation: bridging selective attention and working memory.

Authors:  Adam Gazzaley; Anna C Nobre
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2011-12-28       Impact factor: 20.229

6.  Shaping functional architecture by oscillatory alpha activity: gating by inhibition.

Authors:  Ole Jensen; Ali Mazaheri
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2010-11-04       Impact factor: 3.169

7.  Layer-specific entrainment of γ-band neural activity by the α rhythm in monkey visual cortex.

Authors:  Eelke Spaak; Mathilde Bonnefond; Alexander Maier; David A Leopold; Ole Jensen
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2012-11-15       Impact factor: 10.834

8.  Neural repetition suppression reflects fulfilled perceptual expectations.

Authors:  Christopher Summerfield; Emily H Trittschuh; Jim M Monti; M Marsel Mesulam; Tobias Egner
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 24.884

9.  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

10.  Causal role of the prefrontal cortex in top-down modulation of visual processing and working memory.

Authors:  Theodore P Zanto; Michael T Rubens; Arul Thangavel; Adam Gazzaley
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2011-03-27       Impact factor: 24.884

View more
  26 in total

1.  Learning What Is Irrelevant or Relevant: Expectations Facilitate Distractor Inhibition and Target Facilitation through Distinct Neural Mechanisms.

Authors:  Dirk van Moorselaar; Heleen A Slagter
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2019-07-03       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Filtering visual onsets via habituation: A context-specific long-term memory of irrelevant stimuli.

Authors:  Massimo Turatto; Francesca Bonetti; David Pascucci
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2018-06

Review 3.  Inhibition as a potential resolution to the attentional capture debate.

Authors:  Nicholas Gaspelin; Steven J Luck
Journal:  Curr Opin Psychol       Date:  2018-10-29

4.  Dissociated Neural Mechanisms of Target and Distractor Processing Facilitated by Expectations.

Authors:  Zhenghan Li; Florian Göschl; Guochun Yang
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2020-03-04       Impact factor: 6.167

5.  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 6.  The role of alpha oscillations in spatial attention: limited evidence for a suppression account.

Authors:  Joshua J Foster; Edward Awh
Journal:  Curr Opin Psychol       Date:  2018-11-08

7.  Lateralized Suppression of Alpha-Band EEG Activity As a Mechanism of Target Processing.

Authors:  Felix Bacigalupo; Steven J Luck
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2018-12-06       Impact factor: 6.167

8.  Alpha Activity Reflects the Magnitude of an Individual Bias in Human Perception.

Authors:  Laetitia Grabot; Christoph Kayser
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2020-03-16       Impact factor: 6.167

9.  Strategic Distractor Suppression Improves Selective Control in Human Vision.

Authors:  Wieske van Zoest; Christoph Huber-Huber; Matthew D Weaver; Clayton Hickey
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2021-07-08       Impact factor: 6.167

10.  Statistical learning of target selection and distractor suppression shape attentional priority according to different timeframes.

Authors:  Valeria Di Caro; Chiara Della Libera
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-07-02       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.