Literature DB >> 32032582

What not to look for: Electrophysiological evidence that searchers prefer positive templates.

Jason Rajsic1, Nancy B Carlisle2, Geoffrey F Woodman3.   

Abstract

To-be-attended information can be specified either with positive cues (I'll be wearing a blue shirt) or with negative cues (I won't be wearing a red shirt). Numerous experiments have found that positive cues help search more than negative cues. Given that negative cues produce smaller benefits compared to positive cues, it stands to reason that searchers may choose to use positive templates instead of negative templates if given the opportunity. Here, we evaluate this possibility with behavioral measures as well as by directly measuring the formation of positive and negative templates with event-related potentials. Analysis of the contralateral delay activity (CDA) elicited by cues revealed that positive and negative templates relied on working memory to the same extent, even when negative working memory templates could have been circumvented by relying on long-term memories of target colors. Whereas the CDA did not discriminate positive and negative templates, a CNV-like potential did, suggesting cognitive differences between positive and negative templates beyond visual working memory. However, when both positive and negative information were presented in each cue, participants preferred to make use of the positive cues, as indicated by a CDA contralateral to the positive color in negative cue blocks, and a lack of search benefits for positive- and negative-color cues relative to positive-color cues alone. Our results show that searchers elect to selectively encode only positive information into visual working memory when both positive and negative information are available.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Attention; Event-related potentials; Visual search; Working memory

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32032582      PMCID: PMC9335948          DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2020.107376

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuropsychologia        ISSN: 0028-3932            Impact factor:   3.054


  64 in total

1.  The role of target-distractor relationships in guiding attention and the eyes in visual search.

Authors:  Stefanie I Becker
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2010-05

Review 2.  Toward a Rational and Mechanistic Account of Mental Effort.

Authors:  Amitai Shenhav; Sebastian Musslick; Falk Lieder; Wouter Kool; Thomas L Griffiths; Jonathan D Cohen; Matthew M Botvinick
Journal:  Annu Rev Neurosci       Date:  2017-03-31       Impact factor: 12.449

3.  High stakes trigger the use of multiple memories to enhance the control of attention.

Authors:  Robert M G Reinhart; Geoffrey F Woodman
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2013-02-28       Impact factor: 5.357

Review 4.  Ironic processes of mental control.

Authors:  D M Wegner
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 8.934

5.  Overriding stimulus-driven attentional capture.

Authors:  W F Bacon; H E Egeth
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1994-05

6.  Whatever you do, don't look at the...: Evaluating guidance by an exclusionary attentional template.

Authors:  Valerie M Beck; Steven J Luck; Andrew Hollingworth
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2017-10-16       Impact factor: 3.332

7.  Simultaneous control of attention by multiple working memory representations.

Authors:  Valerie M Beck; Andrew Hollingworth; Steven J Luck
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2012-07-03

8.  In competition for the attentional template: can multiple items within visual working memory guide attention?

Authors:  Dirk van Moorselaar; Jan Theeuwes; Christian N L Olivers
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2014-04-14       Impact factor: 3.332

Review 9.  Top-down versus bottom-up attentional control: a failed theoretical dichotomy.

Authors:  Edward Awh; Artem V Belopolsky; Jan Theeuwes
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2012-07-12       Impact factor: 20.229

Review 10.  Flexibility in Attentional Control: Multiple Sources and Suppression.

Authors:  Nancy B Carlisle
Journal:  Yale J Biol Med       Date:  2019-03-25
View more
  3 in total

1.  Negative cues minimize visual search specificity effects.

Authors:  Ashley M Phelps; Robert G Alexander; Joseph Schmidt
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2022-03-18       Impact factor: 1.984

2.  Asymmetric visual representation of sex from facial appearance.

Authors:  Marco Gandolfo; Paul E Downing
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2022-10-21

Review 3.  Allocation of resources in working memory: Theoretical and empirical implications for visual search.

Authors:  Stanislas Huynh Cong; Dirk Kerzel
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2021-03-17
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.