Literature DB >> 27225635

Implicitly learned suppression of irrelevant spatial locations.

Andrew B Leber1, Rachael E Gwinn2, Yoolim Hong2, Ryan J O'Toole3.   

Abstract

How do we ignore a salient, irrelevant stimulus whose location is predictable? A variety of studies using instructional manipulations have shown that participants possess the capacity to exert location-based suppression. However, for the visual search challenges we face in daily life, we are not often provided explicit instructions and are unlikely to consciously deliberate on what our best strategy might be. Instead, we might rely on our past experience-in the form of implicit learning-to exert strategic control. In this paper, we tested whether implicit learning could drive spatial suppression. In Experiment 1, participants searched displays in which one location contained a target, while another contained a salient distractor. An arrow cue pointed to the target location with 70 % validity. Also, unbeknownst to the participants, the same arrow cue predicted the distractor location with 70 % validity. Results showed facilitated RTs to the predicted target location, confirming target enhancement. Critically, distractor interference was reduced at the predicted distractor location, revealing that participants used spatial suppression. Further, we found that participants had no explicit knowledge of the cue-distractor contingencies, confirming that the learning was implicit. In Experiment 2, to seek further evidence for suppression, we modified the task to include occasional masked probes following the arrow cue; we found worse probe identification accuracy at the predicted distractor location than control locations, providing converging evidence that observers spatially suppressed the predicted distractor locations. These results reveal an ecologically desirable mechanism of suppression, which functions without the need for conscious knowledge or externally guided instructions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Attention; Attention capture; Implicit learning and memory; Spatial attention

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27225635     DOI: 10.3758/s13423-016-1065-y

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


  31 in total

1.  Unsupervised statistical learning of higher-order spatial structures from visual scenes.

Authors:  J Fiser; R N Aslin
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2001-11

2.  Cueing the location of a distractor: an inhibitory mechanism of spatial attention?

Authors:  Jaap Munneke; Stefan Van der Stigchel; Jan Theeuwes
Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)       Date:  2008-06-26

3.  The Psychophysics Toolbox.

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

4.  On the development of procedural knowledge.

Authors:  D B Willingham; M J Nissen; P Bullemer
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1989-11       Impact factor: 3.051

5.  Temporal course of selective attention.

Authors:  C W Eriksen; J F Collins
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1969-05

6.  Attention and the detection of signals.

Authors:  M I Posner; C R Snyder; B J Davidson
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1980-06

7.  Evidence for negative feature guidance in visual search is explained by spatial recoding.

Authors:  Valerie M Beck; Andrew Hollingworth
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2015-07-20       Impact factor: 3.332

8.  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

9.  The Role of Alpha-Band Brain Oscillations as a Sensory Suppression Mechanism during Selective Attention.

Authors:  John J Foxe; Adam C Snyder
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2011-07-05

10.  Individual differences and metacognitive knowledge of visual search strategy.

Authors:  Michael J Proulx
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-10-31       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  7 in total

Review 1.  Habitual versus goal-driven attention.

Authors:  Yuhong V Jiang
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  2017-07-04       Impact factor: 4.027

2.  Passive exposure attenuates distraction during visual search.

Authors:  Bo-Yeong Won; Joy J Geng
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2020-04-06

3.  Tracking neural markers of template formation and implementation in attentional inhibition under different distractor consistency.

Authors:  Wen Wen 雯文; Zhibang Huang 邦黄志; Yin Hou 寅侯; Sheng Li 晟李
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2022-05-11       Impact factor: 6.709

4.  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

5.  Statistical regularities cause attentional suppression with target-matching distractors.

Authors:  Dirk Kerzel; Stanislas Huynh Cong
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2020-11-29       Impact factor: 2.199

6.  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

7.  A saliency-specific and dimension-independent mechanism of distractor suppression.

Authors:  Dongyu Gong; Jan Theeuwes
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2020-10-06       Impact factor: 2.199

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.