Literature DB >> 29762104

Combined Electrophysiological and Behavioral Evidence for the Suppression of Salient Distractors.

Nicholas Gaspelin1,2, Steven J Luck2.   

Abstract

Researchers have long debated how salient-but-irrelevant features guide visual attention. Pure stimulus-driven theories claim that salient stimuli automatically capture attention irrespective of goals, whereas pure goal-driven theories propose that an individual's attentional control settings determine whether salient stimuli capture attention. However, recent studies have suggested a hybrid model in which salient stimuli attract visual attention but can be actively suppressed by top-down attentional mechanisms. Support for this hybrid model has primarily come from ERP studies demonstrating that salient stimuli, which fail to capture attention, also elicit a distractor positivity (PD) component, a putative neural index of suppression. Other support comes from a handful of behavioral studies showing that processing at the salient locations is inhibited compared with other locations. The current study was designed to link the behavioral and neural evidence by combining ERP recordings with an experimental paradigm that provides a behavioral measure of suppression. We found that, when a salient distractor item elicited the PD component, processing at the location of this distractor was suppressed below baseline levels. Furthermore, the magnitude of behavioral suppression and the magnitude of the PD component covaried across participants. These findings provide a crucial connection between the behavioral and neural measures of suppression, which opens the door to using the PD component to assess the timing and neural substrates of the behaviorally observed suppression.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29762104      PMCID: PMC6132257          DOI: 10.1162/jocn_a_01279

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci        ISSN: 0898-929X            Impact factor:   3.225


  41 in total

Review 1.  Top-down and bottom-up control of visual selection.

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

2.  The neural site of attention matches the spatial scale of perception.

Authors:  Jens-Max Hopf; Steven J Luck; Kai Boelmans; Mircea A Schoenfeld; Carsten N Boehler; Jochem Rieger; Hans-Jochen Heinze
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2006-03-29       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  The Psychophysics Toolbox.

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

4.  On the electrophysiological evidence for the capture of visual attention.

Authors:  John J McDonald; Jessica J Green; Ali Jannati; Vincent Di Lollo
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2012-11-19       Impact factor: 3.332

5.  Electrophysiological correlates of feature analysis during visual search.

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

Review 6.  Computational modelling of visual attention.

Authors:  L Itti; C Koch
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 34.870

7.  Electrophysiological evidence of the capture of visual attention.

Authors:  Clayton Hickey; John J McDonald; Jan Theeuwes
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 3.225

8.  Neural sources of focused attention in visual search.

Authors:  J M Hopf; S J Luck; M Girelli; T Hagner; G R Mangun; H Scheich; H J Heinze
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 5.357

9.  Suppression of overt attentional capture by salient-but-irrelevant color singletons.

Authors:  Nicholas Gaspelin; Carly J Leonard; Steven J Luck
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 2.199

10.  ERPLAB: an open-source toolbox for the analysis of event-related potentials.

Authors:  Javier Lopez-Calderon; Steven J Luck
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2014-04-14       Impact factor: 3.169

View more
  32 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.  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.  Can salient stimuli really be suppressed?

Authors:  Seah Chang; Howard E Egeth
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2020-11-25       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 4.  Inhibition as a potential resolution to the attentional capture debate.

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

5.  Motor Interference, But Not Sensory Interference, Increases Midfrontal Theta Activity and Brain Synchronization during Reactive Control.

Authors:  Jakob Kaiser; Simone Schütz-Bosbach
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2021-01-13       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Oculomotor suppression of abrupt onsets versus color singletons.

Authors:  Owen J Adams; Eric Ruthruff; Nicholas Gaspelin
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2022-06-14       Impact factor: 2.199

7.  Oculomotor Inhibition of Salient Distractors: Voluntary Inhibition Cannot Override Selection History.

Authors:  Nicholas Gaspelin; John M Gaspar; Steven J Luck
Journal:  Vis cogn       Date:  2019-04-09

8.  Specificity and persistence of statistical learning in distractor suppression.

Authors:  Mark K Britton; Brian A Anderson
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2019-12-30       Impact factor: 3.332

9.  Progress Toward Resolving the Attentional Capture Debate.

Authors:  Steven J Luck; Nicholas Gaspelin; Charles L Folk; Roger W Remington; Jan Theeuwes
Journal:  Vis cogn       Date:  2020-12-01

10.  Controlling the Flow of Distracting Information in Working Memory.

Authors:  Nicole Hakim; Tobias Feldmann-Wüstefeld; Edward Awh; Edward K Vogel
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2021-06-10       Impact factor: 5.357

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.