Relating distractor suppression to problematic drinking behavior

BACKGROUND

Impaired cognitive control has been linked to weakened self-regulatory processes underlying compulsive substance intake. Previous research has provided evidence for impaired task performance in substance-abusing groups during Stroop and Go/No-Go tasks. Mechanisms of distractor suppression in visual search might also involve overlapping regulatory components that support goal-directed behavior by resolving the attentional competition between distractors and the target of search. However, the efficiency of learning-dependent distractor suppression has not been examined in the context of drug abuse and a direct comparison between cognitive control and distractor suppression is lacking.

METHOD

A total of 84 participants were assigned either to the heavy drinking group (ALC, n = 42) or the control group (CTL, n = 42) based on self-reported substance use. Participants completed the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS). After that, participants completed a computerized version of the Stroop task, Go/No-go task, and a visual search task measuring learning-dependent distractor suppression.

RESULTS

The Stroop effect and the frequency of no-go errors did not differ between groups. However, learned distractor suppression was significantly blunted in the ALC group compared to the control group. Across participants, performance on the Stroop and Go/No-go task were correlated, while the magnitude of distractor suppression was related to neither.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support a divergence of mechanistic processes underlying cognitive control and attentional control, and demonstrate impaired learning-dependent distractor suppression in heavy drinkers relative to a control group. Impaired distractor suppression offers new insight into why drug cues can be difficult to ignore.

Effects of spatial location on distractor interference

When target and distractor stimuli are close together, they activate the same neurons and there is ambiguity as to what the neural activity represents. It has been suggested that the ambiguity is resolved by spatial competition between target and nontarget stimuli. A competitive advantage is conveyed by bottom-up biases (e.g., stimulus saliency) and top-down biases (e.g., the match to a stored representation of the target stimulus). Here, we tested the hypothesis that regions with high perceptual performance may provide a bottom-up bias, resulting in increased distractor interference. Initially, we focused on two known anisotropies. At equal distance from central fixation, perceptual performance is better along the horizontal than the vertical meridian, and in the lower than in the upper visual hemifield. Consistently, interference from distractors on the horizontal meridian was greater than interference from distractors on the vertical meridian. However, distractors in the lower hemifield interfered less than distractors in the upper visual hemifield, which is contrary to the known anisotropy. These results were obtained with targets and distractors on opposite meridians. Further, we observed greater interference from distractors on the meridians compared with distractors on the diagonals, possibly reflecting anisotropies in attentional scanning. Overall, the results are only partially consistent with the hypothesis that distractor interference is larger for distractors on regions with high perceptual performance.

The inhibitory effect of a recent distractor: singleton vs. multiple distractors

In the complex interplay between sensory and cognitive processes, the brain must sift through a flood of sensory data to pinpoint relevant signals. This selective mechanism is crucial for the effective control of behaviour, by allowing organisms to focus on important tasks and blocking out distractions. The Inhibition of a Recent Distractor (IRD) Task examines this selection process by exploring how inhibiting distractors influences subsequent eye movements towards an object in the visual environment. In a series of experiments, research by Crawford et al. (2005a) demonstrated a delayed response to a target appearing at the location that was previously occupied by a distractor, demonstrating a legacy inhibition exerted by the distractor on the spatial location of the upcoming target. This study aimed to replicate this effect and to investigate any potential constraints when multiple distractors are presented. Exploring whether the effect is observed in more ecologically relevant scenarios with multiple distractors is crucial for assessing the extent to which it can be applied to a broader range of environments. Experiment 1 successfully replicated the effect, showing a significant IRD effect only with a single distractor. Experiments 2-5 explored a number of possible explanations for this phenomenon.

Terms of debate: Consensus definitions to guide the scientific discourse on visual distraction

Hypothesis-driven research rests on clearly articulated scientific theories. The building blocks for communicating these theories are scientific terms. Obviously, communication - and thus, scientific progress - is hampered if the meaning of these terms varies idiosyncratically across (sub)fields and even across individual researchers within the same subfield. We have formed an international group of experts representing various theoretical stances with the goal to homogenize the use of the terms that are most relevant to fundamental research on visual distraction in visual search. Our discussions revealed striking heterogeneity and we had to invest much time and effort to increase our mutual understanding of each other's use of central terms, which turned out to be strongly related to our respective theoretical positions. We present the outcomes of these discussions in a glossary and provide some context in several essays. Specifically, we explicate how central terms are used in the distraction literature and consensually sharpen their definitions in order to enable communication across theoretical standpoints. Where applicable, we also explain how the respective constructs can be measured. We believe that this novel type of adversarial collaboration can serve as a model for other fields of psychological research that strive to build a solid groundwork for theorizing and communicating by establishing a common language. For the field of visual distraction, the present paper should facilitate communication across theoretical standpoints and may serve as an introduction and reference text for newcomers.

Evidence that proactive distractor suppression does not require attentional resources

Does the suppression of irrelevant visual features require attentional resources? McDonald et al. (2023, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 30, 224-234) proposed that suppression processes are unavailable while a person is busy performing another task. They reported the absence of the PD (believed to index suppression) when two tasks were presented close together in time. We looked for converging evidence using established behavior measures of suppression. Following McDonald et al., our participants performed a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) task followed by a search task. For the RSVP task, participants determined whether the target digit 4 or 6 appeared within a string of other digits. The search display appeared at a lag of 2 or 8 digits after the RSVP target. Participants searched for a yellow target circle amongst nine background circles, which included a uniquely colored distractor for some trials. The main question was whether distractor suppression would occur at Lag 2, while attentional resources were still processing the RSVP target. Suppression was assessed using the capture-probe paradigm. On 30% of trials, probe letters appeared inside the colored circles and participants reported those letters. Probe recall accuracy was lower at locations with distractor colors than those with neutral colors (the baseline), suggesting proactive suppression. Critically, this difference in probe recall accuracy was similar at Lag 2 and Lag 8, suggesting that the ability to proactively suppress distractors remains intact while dual-tasking. We argue that although reactive suppression likely requires attentional resources, proactive suppression-an implicit process-does not.

Multifaceted consequences of visual distraction during natural behaviour

Visual distraction is a ubiquitous aspect of everyday life. Studying the consequences of distraction during temporally extended tasks, however, is not tractable with traditional methods. Here we developed a virtual reality approach that segments complex behaviour into cognitive subcomponents, including encoding, visual search, working memory usage, and decision-making. Participants copied a model display by selecting objects from a resource pool and placing them into a workspace. By manipulating the distractibility of objects in the resource pool, we discovered interfering effects of distraction across the different cognitive subcomponents. We successfully traced the consequences of distraction all the way from overall task performance to the decision-making processes that gate memory usage. Distraction slowed down behaviour and increased costly body movements. Critically, distraction increased encoding demands, slowed visual search, and decreased reliance on working memory. Our findings illustrate that the effects of visual distraction during natural behaviour can be rather focal but nevertheless have cascading consequences.

Alpha desynchronization during the filtering initiation phase reflects active processing of distractors

The ability to select task-relevant information and filter out task-irrelevant information is critical to our success in daily goal-directed behavior. Researchers call this ability filtering efficiency and divide it into three cognitive processing stages: detection of distractors, initiation of filtering, and unnecessary storage. Although researchers have conducted more studies on ERP components related to filtration efficiency, there are few studies related to neural oscillations. Alpha oscillation activity is related to the active processing of information and the suppression of distractors. In the current EEG study, we used the change detection task with distracted items to examine whether alpha activity during filtering initiation reflects reactive suppression of distractors by manipulating memory load levels and the presence or absence of distractors. Results showed that, the presence of the distractors caused an increase in the degree of desynchronization of the alpha oscillations, and in the subsequent time, the alpha activity level returned to a level consistent with the absence of interference conditions. Phase synchronization between frontal and posterior brain regions in the upper alpha oscillations found no effects associated with distractors. Based on these results, we believed that the alpha activity during the filtering initiation phase reflected the active processing of distractors, but this may also be due to lower perceptual load of the target items. In addition, we observed a dominance effect of the right hemisphere in both time-frequency results and connectivity results. We speculate that this effect is related to the activation of the right ventral frontoparietal network.

Neural evidence for attentional capture by salient distractors

Salient objects often capture our attention, serving as distractors and hindering our current goals. It remains unclear when and how salient distractors interact with our goals, and our knowledge on the neural mechanisms responsible for attentional capture is limited to a few brain regions recorded from non-human primates. Here we conducted a multivariate analysis on human intracranial signals covering most brain regions and successfully dissociated distractor-specific representations from target-arousal signals in the high-frequency (60-100 Hz) activity. We found that salient distractors were processed rapidly around 220 ms, while target-tuning attention was attenuated simultaneously, supporting initial capture by distractors. Notably, neuronal activity specific to the distractor representation was strongest in the superior and middle temporal gyrus, amygdala and anterior cingulate cortex, while there were smaller contributions from the parietal and frontal cortices. These results provide neural evidence for attentional capture by salient distractors engaging a much larger network than previously appreciated.

From learned value to sustained bias: how reward conditioning changes attentional priority

Introduction

Attentional bias to reward-associated stimuli can occur even when it interferes with goal-driven behavior. One theory posits that dopaminergic signaling in the striatum during reward conditioning leads to changes in visual cortical and parietal representations of the stimulus used, and this, in turn, sustains attentional bias even when reward is discontinued. However, only a few studies have examined neural activity during both rewarded and unrewarded task phases.

Methods

In the current study, participants first completed a reward-conditioning phase, during which responses to certain stimuli were associated with monetary reward. These stimuli were then included as non-predictive cues in a spatial cueing task. Participants underwent functional brain imaging during both task phases.

Results

The results show that striatal activity during the learning phase predicted increased visual cortical and parietal activity and decreased ventro-medial prefrontal cortex activity in response to conditioned stimuli during the test. Striatal activity was also associated with anterior cingulate cortex activation when the reward-conditioned stimulus directed attention away from the target.

Discussion

Our findings suggest that striatal activity during reward conditioning predicts the degree to which reward history biases attention through learning-induced changes in visual and parietal activities.

Trichotomy revisited: A monolithic theory of attentional control

The control of attention was long held to reflect the influence of two competing mechanisms of assigning priority, one goal-directed and the other stimulus-driven. Learning-dependent influences on the control of attention that could not be attributed to either of those two established mechanisms of control gave rise to the concept of selection history and a corresponding third mechanism of attentional control. The trichotomy framework that ensued has come to dominate theories of attentional control over the past decade, replacing the historical dichotomy. In this theoretical review, I readily affirm that distinctions between the influence of goals, salience, and selection history are substantive and meaningful, and that abandoning the dichotomy between goal-directed and stimulus-driven mechanisms of control was appropriate. I do, however, question whether a theoretical trichotomy is the right answer to the problem posed by selection history. If we reframe the influence of goals and selection history as different flavors of memory-dependent modulations of attentional priority and if we characterize the influence of salience as a consequence of insufficient competition from such memory-dependent sources of priority, it is possible to account for a wide range of attention-related phenomena with only one mechanism of control. The monolithic framework for the control of attention that I propose offers several concrete advantages over a trichotomy framework, which I explore here.

Task-irrelevant valence-preferred colors boost visual search for a singleton-shape target

Some studies have suggested that emotion-associated features might influence attentional capture. However, demonstrating valence-dependent distractor interference has proven challenging, possibly due to the neglect of individuals' color-valence preferences in standard, averaged reaction-time (RT) measures. To address this, we investigated valence-driven attentional-capture using an association phase in which emotionally neutral vs. positive-feedback photographs were paired with two alternative target colors, red vs. green. This was followed by a test phase requiring participants to search for a pop-out shape target in the presence or absence of an emotion-associated color. In Experiments 1 and 2, this color could only appear in a distractor, while in Experiment 3, it appeared in the target. Analyzing the standard, averaged RT measures, we found no significant valence association or valence-modulated attentional capture. However, correlational analyses revealed a positive relationship between individual participants' color-valence preference during the association phase and their valence-based effect during the test phase. Moreover, most individuals favored red over green in the association phase, leading to marked color-related asymmetries in the average measures. Crucially, the presence of the valence-preferred color anywhere in the test display facilitated RTs. This effect persisted even when the color appeared in one of the distractors (Experiments 1 and 2), at variance with this distractor capturing attention. These findings suggest that task-irrelevant valence-preferred color signals were registered pre-attentively and boosted performance, likely by raising the general (non-spatial) alertness level. However, these signals were likely kept out of attentional-priority computation to prevent inadvertent attentional capture.

Reliably Measuring Learning-Dependent Distractor Suppression with Eye Tracking

In the field of psychological science, behavioral performance in computer-based cognitive tasks often exhibits poor reliability. The absence of reliable measures of cognitive processes contributes to non-reproducibility in the field and impedes investigation of individual differences. Specifically in visual search paradigms, response time-based measures have shown poor test-retest reliability and internal consistency across attention capture and distractor suppression, but one study has demonstrated the potential for oculomotor measures to exhibit superior reliability. Therefore, in this study, we investigated three datasets to compare the reliability of learning-dependent distractor suppression measured via distractor fixations (oculomotor capture) and latency to fixate the target (fixation times). Our findings reveal superior split-half reliability of oculomotor capture compared to that of fixation times regardless of the critical distractor comparison, with the reliability of oculomotor capture in most cases falling within the range that is acceptable for the investigation of individual differences. We additionally find that older adults have superior oculomotor reliability compared with young adults, potentially addressing a significant limitation in the aging literature of high variability in response time measures due to slower responses. Our findings highlight the utility of measuring eye movements in the pursuit of reliable indicators of distractor processing and the need to further test and develop additional measures in other sensory domains to maximize statistical power, reliability, and reproducibility.

Separate and overlapping mechanisms of statistical regularities and salience processing in the occipital cortex and dorsal attention network

Attention selects behaviorally relevant inputs for in-depth processing. Beside the role of traditional signals related to goal-directed and stimulus-driven control, a debate exists regarding the mechanisms governing the effect of statistical regularities on attentional selection, and how these are integrated with other control signals. Using a visuo-spatial search task under fMRI, we tested the joint effects of statistical regularities and stimulus-driven salience. We found that both types of signals modulated occipital activity in a spatially specific manner. Salience acted primarily by reducing the attention bias towards the target location when associated with irrelevant distractors, while statistical regularities reduced this attention bias when the target was presented at a low probability location, particularly at the lower levels of the visual hierarchy. In addition, we found that both statistical regularities and salience activated the dorsal frontoparietal network. Additional exploratory analyses of functional connectivity revealed that only statistical regularities modulated the inter-regional coupling between the posterior parietal cortex and the occipital cortex. These results show that statistical regularities and salience signals are both spatially represented at the occipital level, but that their integration into attentional processing priorities relies on dissociable brain mechanisms.

On preventing capture: Does greater salience cause greater suppression?

It has been proposed that salient objects have high potential to disrupt target performance, and so people learn to proactively suppress them, thereby preventing these salient distractors from capturing attention in the future. Consistent with this hypothesis, Gaspar et al. (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(13), 3693-3698, 2016) reported that the PD (believed to index suppression) was larger for high-salient color distractors than for low-salient color distractors. The present study looked for converging evidence that salience triggers suppression using established behavior measures of suppression. Following Gaspar et al., our participants searched for a yellow target circle among nine background circles, which sometimes included one circle with a unique color. The distractor was either high or low in salience with respect to the background circles. The question was whether the high-salient color would be proactively suppressed more strongly than the low-salient color. This was assessed using the capture-probe paradigm. On 33% of trials, probe letters appeared inside colored circles and participants were to report those letters. If high-salient colors are more strongly suppressed, then probe recall accuracy should be lower at locations with the high-salient color than those with the low-salient color. Experiment 1 found no such effect. A similar finding was observed in Experiment 2 after addressing possible floor effects. These findings suggest that proactive suppression is not caused by salience. We propose that the PD reflects not only proactive suppression but also reactive suppression.

The Distractor Positivity Component and the Inhibition of Distracting Stimuli

There has been a long-lasting debate about whether salient stimuli, such as uniquely colored objects, have the ability to automatically distract us. To resolve this debate, it has been suggested that salient stimuli do attract attention but that they can be suppressed to prevent distraction. Some research supporting this viewpoint has focused on a newly discovered ERP component called the distractor positivity (PD), which is thought to measure an inhibitory attentional process. This collaborative review summarizes previous research relying on this component with a specific emphasis on how the PD has been used to understand the ability to ignore distracting stimuli. In particular, we outline how the PD component has been used to gain theoretical insights about how search strategy and learning can influence distraction. We also review alternative accounts of the cognitive processes indexed by the PD component. Ultimately, we conclude that the PD component is a useful tool for understanding inhibitory processes related to distraction and may prove to be useful in other areas of study related to cognitive control.

Relative contributions of oculomotor capture and disengagement to distractor-related dwell times in visual search

In visual search, attention is reliably captured by salient distractors and must be actively disengaged from them to reach the target. In such attentional capture paradigms, dwell time is measured on distractors that appear in the periphery (e.g., on a random location on a circle). Distractor-related dwell time is typically thought to be largely due to stimulus-driven processes related to oculomotor capture dynamics. However, the extent to which oculomotor capture and oculomotor disengagement contribute to distractor dwell time has not been known because standard attentional capture paradigms cannot decouple these processes. In the present study, we used a novel paradigm combining classical attentional capture trials and delayed disengagement trials. We measured eye movements to dissociate the capture and disengagement mechanisms underlying distractor dwell time. We found that only two-thirds of distractor dwell time (~ 52 ms) can be explained by oculomotor capture, while one-third is explained by oculomotor disengagement (~ 18 ms), which has been neglected or underestimated in previous studies. Thus, oculomotor disengagement (goal-directed) processes play a more significant role in distractor dwell times than previously thought.

Long-term (statistically learnt) and short-term (inter-trial) distractor-location effects arise at different pre- and post-selective processing stages

A salient distractor interferes less with visual search if it appears at a location where it is likely to occur, referred to as distractor-location probability cueing. Conversely, if the current target appears at the same location as a distractor on the preceding trial, search is impeded. While these two location-specific "suppression" effects reflect long-term, statistically learnt and short-term, inter-trial adaptations of the system to distractors, it is unclear at what stage(s) of processing they arise. Here, we adopted the additional-singleton paradigm and examined lateralized event-related potentials (L-ERPs) and lateralized alpha (8-12 Hz) power to track the temporal dynamics of these effects. Behaviorally, we confirmed both effects: reaction times (RTs) interference was reduced for distractors at frequent versus rare (distractor) locations, and RTs were delayed for targets that appeared at previous distractor versus non-distractor locations. Electrophysiologically, the statistical-learning effect was not associated with lateralized alpha power during the pre-stimulus period. Rather, it was seen in an early N1pc referenced to the frequent distractor location (whether or not a distractor or a target occurred there), indicative of a learnt top-down prioritization of this location. This early top-down influence was systematically modulated by (competing) target- and distractor-generated bottom-up saliency signals in the display. In contrast, the inter-trial effect was reflected in an enhanced SPCN when the target was preceded by a distractor at its location. This suggests that establishing that an attentionally selected item is a task-relevant target, rather than an irrelevant distractor, is more demanding at a previously "rejected" distractor location.

Causal investigation of mid-frontal theta activity in memory guided visual search

Midfrontal theta activity is crucial for attentional and cognitive control. However, its causal role in facilitating visual search, particularly from the perspective of distractor inhibition, is yet to be discovered. We applied theta band transcranial alternate current stimulation (tACS) over frontocentral regions when participants searched for targets among heterogeneous distractors with foreknowledge of distractor features. The results demonstrated improved visual search performance in the theta stimulation group compared to the active sham group. Moreover, we observed the facilitation effect of the distractor cue only in participants who exhibited larger inhibition benefits, which further confirms the role of theta stimulation in precise attentional control. Taken together, our results provide compelling causal evidence for the involvement of midfrontal theta activity in memory-guided visual search.

Spike rates of frontal eye field neurons predict reaction times in a spatial attention task

Which neuronal signal(s) predict reaction times when subjects respond to a target at covertly attended locations? Although recent studies showed that spike rates are not predictive, it remains a highly contested question. Therefore, we record single-unit activity from frontal eye field (FEF) neurons while macaques are performing a covert spatial attention task. We find that the attentional modulation of spike rates of FEF neurons is strongly correlated with behavioral reaction times. Moreover, this correlation already emerges 1 s before target dimming, which triggers the behavioral responses. This prediction of reaction times by spike rates is found in neurons showing attention-dependent enhanced and suppressed activity for targets and distractors, respectively, yet in varying degrees across subjects. Thus, spike rates of FEF neurons can predict reaction times persistently and well before the operant behavior during selective attention tasks. Such long prediction windows will be useful for developing spike-based brain-machine interfaces.

Slow neural oscillations explain temporal fluctuations in distractibility

Human environments comprise various sources of distraction, which often occur unexpectedly in time. The proneness to distraction (i.e., distractibility) is posited to be independent of attentional sampling of targets, but its temporal dynamics and neurobiological basis are largely unknown. Brain oscillations in the theta band (3 - 8Hz) have been associated with fluctuating neural excitability, which is hypothesised here to explain rhythmic modulation of distractibility. In a pitch discrimination task (N = 30) with unexpected auditory distractors, we show that distractor-evoked neural responses in the electroencephalogram and perceptual susceptibility to distraction were co-modulated and cycled approximately 3 - 5 times per second. Pre-distractor neural phase in left inferior frontal and insular cortex regions explained fluctuating distractibility. Thus, human distractibility is not constant but fluctuates on a subsecond timescale. Furthermore, slow neural oscillations subserve the behavioural consequences of a hitherto largely unexplained but ever-increasing phenomenon in modern environments - distraction by unexpected sound.

Age differences in the use of positive and negative cues to filter distracting information from working memory

Previous research has demonstrated that as people age, visual working memory (VWM) declines. One potential explanation for this decline is that older adults are less able to ignore irrelevant information, which contributes to VWM filtering deficits. Most research examining age differences in filtering ability has used positive cues (indicating which items to pay attention to), but negative cues (indicating which items to ignore) may be even harder for older adults to implement as some work suggests that negatively cued items are first paid attention to before they are suppressed. The current study aimed to test whether older adults can use negative cues to filter irrelevant information from VWM. Across two experiments, young and older adults were presented with two (Experiment 1) or four (Experiment 2) display items, preceded by a neutral, negative, or positive cue. After a delay, participants reported the target's orientation in a continuous-response task. Results show that both groups benefitted from being provided with a cue (positive or negative) compared to no cue (i.e., neutral condition), but the benefit was smaller for negative cues. Thus, although negative cues aid in filtering of VWM, they are less effective than positive cues, possibly due to residual attention being directed towards distractor items.

Neurocognitive function and quality-of-life in patients with colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

Colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors report significant long-term physical and cognitive declines post-treatment. Our purpose was to combine task-evoked Event-Related Potential (ERP) and resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rsf/MRI) methodologies to characterize the physiological underpinnings and cognitive sequelae of chemotherapy-related cognitive impairment, including changes in Quality-Of-Life (QOL) in patients with CRC, as compared to healthy control (HC) participants.

METHODS

This descriptive study recruited and obtained baseline data from patients with CRC at medical and surgical oncology visits four to six weeks post-op and followed them at 12- and 24-weeks. Procedures employed ERP, pencil and paper neuropsychological testing (N-P), structural/functional rsf/MRI, and self-report QOL methodologies. Data analyses included correlations, one-way ANOVA, Chi-square tests, and linear mixed models.

RESULTS

Study participants (n = 40) across groups (n = 15, 11, 14) were balanced on age, sex, education, and race, but not ^{marital status} Several significant associations were found between changes in Dorsal Attention Network (DAN)-related ERP measures (P2, N2, N2P2, N2pc amplitudes), with QOL measures between baseline and last visits (p < 0.05-0.001). Additionally, rsf/MRI findings showed increased network activity in a single node of the DAN post-treatment, which was associated with poorer performance on N-P tests of attention and working memory, as well as a focal decline in grey matter volume in the area.

CONCLUSIONS

Our methodology revealed structural and functional changes within the DAN associated with altered spatial attention, working memory, and ability to inhibit. These disruptions may be responsible for decreased QOL ratings in patients with CRC. This study provides a putative mechanism of understanding how altered brain structural/functional relationships impact cognition, QOL, and nursing care in patients with CRC.

NCI TRIAL ID

NCI-2020-05952, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Clinical Trials.gov ID NCT03683004.

Suppression of distracting inputs by visual-spatial cues is driven by anticipatory alpha activity

A growing body of research demonstrates that distracting inputs can be proactively suppressed via spatial cues, nonspatial cues, or experience, which are governed by more than one top-down mechanism of attention. However, how the neural mechanisms underlying spatial distractor cues guide proactive suppression of distracting inputs remains unresolved. Here, we recorded electroencephalography signals from 110 participants in 3 experiments to identify the role of alpha activity in proactive distractor suppression induced by spatial cues and its influence on subsequent distractor inhibition. Behaviorally, we found novel changes in the spatial proximity of the distractor: Cueing distractors far away from the target improves search performance for the target, while cueing distractors close to the target hampers performance. Crucially, we found dynamic characteristics of spatial representation for distractor suppression during anticipation. This result was further verified by alpha power increased relatively contralateral to the cued distractor. At both the between- and within-subjects levels, we found that these activities further predicted the decrement of the subsequent PD component, which was indicative of reduced distractor interference. Moreover, anticipatory alpha activity and its link with the subsequent PD component were specific to the high predictive validity of distractor cue. Together, our results reveal the underlying neural mechanisms by which cueing the spatial distractor may contribute to reduced distractor interference. These results also provide evidence supporting the role of alpha activity as gating by proactive suppression.

Functional connectivity fingerprints of the frontal eye field and inferior frontal junction suggest spatial versus nonspatial processing in the prefrontal cortex

Neuroimaging evidence suggests that the frontal eye field (FEF) and inferior frontal junction (IFJ) govern the encoding of spatial and nonspatial (such as feature- or object-based) representations, respectively, both during visual attention and working memory tasks. However, it is still unclear whether such contrasting functional segregation is also reflected in their underlying functional connectivity patterns. Here, we hypothesized that FEF has predominant functional coupling with spatiotopically organized regions in the dorsal ('where') visual stream whereas IFJ has predominant functional connectivity with the ventral ('what') visual stream. We applied seed-based functional connectivity analyses to temporally high-resolving resting-state magnetoencephalography (MEG) recordings. We parcellated the brain according to the multimodal Glasser atlas and tested, for various frequency bands, whether the spontaneous activity of each parcel in the ventral and dorsal visual pathway has predominant functional connectivity with FEF or IFJ. The results show that FEF has a robust power correlation with the dorsal visual pathway in beta and gamma bands. In contrast, anterior IFJ (IFJa) has a strong power coupling with the ventral visual stream in delta, beta and gamma oscillations. Moreover, while FEF is phase-coupled with the superior parietal lobe in the beta band, IFJa is phase-coupled with the middle and inferior temporal cortex in delta and gamma oscillations. We argue that these intrinsic connectivity fingerprints are congruent with each brain region's function. Therefore, we conclude that FEF and IFJ have dissociable connectivity patterns that fit their respective functional roles in spatial versus nonspatial top-down attention and working memory control.

Neurophysiological evidence against attentional suppression as the source of the same-location cost in spatial cueing

Spatial cues that mismatch the colour of a subsequent target have been shown to slow responses to targets that share their location. The source of this 'same location cost' (SLC) is currently unknown. Two potential sources are attentional signal suppression and object-file updating. Here, we tested a direct prediction of the suppression account using data from a spatial-cueing study in which we recorded brain activity using electroencephalography (EEG), and focusing on the event-related P_D component, which is thought to index attentional signal suppression. Correlating P_D amplitude with SLC magnitude, we tested the prediction that if attentional signal suppression is the source of the SLC, then the SLC should be positively correlated with P_D amplitude. Across 48 participants, SLC and P_D magnitudes were negatively correlated, in direct contradiction to a suppression account of the SLC. These results are compatible with an object-file updating account of the SLC in which updating is facilitated by reactive suppression of the to-be-updated stimulus information.

Pre-saccadic attention relies more on suppression than does covert attention

During covert and pre-saccadic attentional shifts, it is unclear how facilitation and suppression processes interact for target selection. A recent countermanding task pointed to greater suppression at unattended locations during trials with saccades compared to trials without saccades (i.e., fixation and successful stop trials), whereas target facilitation did not differ. It is unknown whether this finding is restricted to countermanding paradigms that involve inhibitory processes. To test this, we adapted Gaspelin and colleagues (2015)'s attention capture task where, within the same block, one location was primed with frequent line discrimination trials, and all locations were occasionally probed using letters report trials. Participants also performed a baseline condition without priming. We tested 15 participants and examined how performance at non-primed locations was affected by covert versus pre-saccadic attention in blocks of four or six items, as well as by position from the primed location and timing from saccade onset. For both attention conditions, letter report at non-primed locations was worse compared to baseline, demonstrating suppression, and letter report at primed location was better, demonstrating facilitation. In saccades trials, letter report was better at primed locations and worse at non-primed locations compared to fixation trials. The timing of this additional pre-saccadic suppression differed from saccadic suppression. In both attention conditions, suppression was greater when primed and non-primed locations were within the same hemifield or in diagonal opposite quadrants. These results confirmed that attention preceding saccade execution suppressed non-primed locations to a larger extent than covert attention, with the same spatial quadrant effect.

Learned feature regularities enable suppression of spatially overlapping stimuli

Contemporary theories of attentional control state that information can be prioritized based on selection history. Even though theories agree that selection history can impact representations of spatial location, which in turn helps guide attention, there remains disagreement on whether nonspatial features (e.g., color) are modulated in a similar way. While previous work has demonstrated color suppression using visual search tasks, it is possible that the location corresponding to the distractor was suppressed, consistent with a spatial mechanism of suppression. Here, we sought to rule out this possibility by testing whether similar suppression of a learned distractor color can occur for spatially overlapping visual stimuli. On a given trial, two spatially superimposed stimuli (line arrays) were tilted either left or right of vertical and presented in one of four distinct colors. Subjects performed a speeded report of the orientation of the “target” array with the most lines. Critically, the distractor array was regularly one color, and this high-probability color was never the color of the target array, which encouraged learned suppression. In two experiments, responses to the target array were fastest when the distractor array was in the high-probability color, suggesting participants suppressed the distractor color. Additionally, when regularities were removed, the high-probability distractor color continued to benefit speeded target identification for individual subjects (E1) but slowed target identification (E2) when presented in the target array. Together, these results indicate that learned suppression of feature-based regularities modulates target detection performance independent of spatial location and persists over time.

Negative and positive templates: Two forms of cued attentional control

Our ability to control our attention to focus on goal-relevant information is critical for functioning in daily life. In addition to the typical attentional control driven by target enhancement described in most theories of attention, recent research has focused on our ability to use information about distractions maintained in working memory to direct our attention away from known distractors. Using these negative templates can improve the efficiency of attention, much in the same way as enhancing information matching search targets. However, these effects only occur for specific tasks or in specific circumstances. In this review, I will focus on our emerging understanding of the relationship between distractor ignoring from negative templates and target enhancement from positive templates. I will also highlight key remaining questions for further study.

How do (perceptual) distracters distract?

When a target stimulus occurs in the presence of distracters, decisions are less accurate. But how exactly do distracters affect choices? Here, we explored this question using measurement of human behaviour, psychophysical reverse correlation and computational modelling. We contrasted two models: one in which targets and distracters had independent influence on choices (independent model) and one in which distracters modulated choices in a way that depended on their similarity to the target (interaction model). Across three experiments, participants were asked to make fine orientation judgments about the tilt of a target grating presented adjacent to an irrelevant distracter. We found strong evidence for the interaction model, in that decisions were more sensitive when target and distracter were consistent relative to when they were inconsistent. This consistency bias occurred in the frame of reference of the decision, that is, it operated on decision values rather than on sensory signals, and surprisingly, it was independent of spatial attention. A normalization framework, where target features are normalized by the expectation and variability of the local context, successfully captures the observed pattern of results.

In the real world, visual scenes usually contain many objects. As a consequence, we often have to make perceptual judgments about a specific ‘target’ stimulus in the presence of irrelevant ‘distracter’ stimuli. For instance, when hanging a picture frame, we want to discern whether it is hanging straight, ignoring the surrounding, potentially tilted frames. Laboratory experiments have shown that the presence of distracter stimuli (i.e. other picture frames) makes this type of perceptual judgment less accurate. However, the specific effect distracters have on judgments is controversial. Here, we conducted a series of experiments to compare two alternative theories of distracter influence: one in which distracters compete with targets to determine choices (independent model) and one in which distracters wield a more indirect influence on choices (interaction model). We found evidence for the latter account. Our results suggest distracters affect perceptual decisions by adjusting how sensitive decisions are to the target stimulus.

Learned low priority of attention after training to suppress color singleton distractor

Allocating attention to significant events, such as a salient object, is effortless. Our brain is effective on this type of processing because doing so is generally beneficial for survival. However, a salient object could also be distracting and ignoring it costs a large amount of cognitive resource. In the present study, we conducted two behavioral experiments to investigate the effect of learned suppression of a salient color. Particularly, we were interested in the effect of learning in a new task context in which the previously suppressed color was task irrelevant. In Experiment 1, we trained the participants for five days with explicit instruction to suppress a color singleton distractor in a visual search task. We measured the effect of training with a dot probe task before and after the training. Colors in the dot probe task only served as the background and were not associated with the position of the target dot. However, we found that attention was involuntarily biased away from the previously suppressed color. In Experiment 2, the color singleton could either be the target or distractor in the visual search task, making the suppression of the color singleton inefficient for task performance. The results showed no training effect in the dot probe task after this manipulation. These findings provided direct evidence for the learned low priority of attention after training to suppress the color singleton distractor.

Attenuating the 'attentional white bear' effect enhances suppressive attention

Trying to ignore an object can bias attention towards it – a phenomenon referred to as the ‘attentional white bear’ (AWB) effect. The mechanisms behind this effect remain unclear. On one hand, the AWB may reflect reactive, ‘search and destroy’ distractor suppression, which directs attention toward irrelevant objects in order to suppress further attention to them. However, another possibility is that the AWB results from failed proactive distractor suppression – attempting to suppress attention to an irrelevant object from the outset may inadvertently result in an attentional shift towards it. To distinguish these two possibilities, we developed a categorical visual search task that addresses limitations present in prior studies. In five experiments (N_total = 96), participants searched displays of naturalistic stimuli cued only with distractor categories (targets were unknown and unpredictable). We observed an AWB and later attenuated it by presenting a pre-search stimulus, likely disrupting guidance from distractor templates in working memory. We conclude that the AWB resulted from a failure of proactive suppression rather than a search and destroy process.

Learned distractor rejection persists across target search in a different dimension

Attention is guided by several factors, including task-relevant target features, which attract attention, but also statistical regularities associated distractors, which repel attention away from themselves. However, whether feature-based distractor regularities (e.g., color) are extracted automatically from a feature dimension orthogonal to the target-guiding dimension (e.g., shape) remains to be tested. In two experiments, we tested if learned distractor rejection by color operated when color was not part of the attentional control settings, specifically, while attention was guided by a shape-based target template. Participants performed a visual search task for a task-relevant shape in displays containing two unsegregated colors. These displays allowed us to manipulate target guidance (based on shape) independently from distractor-based regularities (based on color). In both experiments we found clear evidence for learned distractor rejection: faster mean response times to locate the target when a consistent distractor color was present than when it was absent. Critically, these task-irrelevant learned distractor rejection effects were robust despite strong target guidance by an orthogonal search dimension. These findings corroborate recent demonstrations of learned distractor rejection during strong target guidance, indicating that learned distractor rejection and target guidance can operate on separate feature dimensions.

Systemic effects of selection history on learned ignoring

Despite our best intentions, physically salient but entirely task-irrelevant stimuli can sometimes capture our attention. With learning, it is possible to more efficiently ignore such stimuli, although specifically how the visual system accomplishes this remains to be clarified. Using a sample of young-adult participants, we examined the time course of eye movements to targets and distractors. We replicate a reduced frequency of eye movements to the distractor when appearing in a location at which distractors are frequently encountered. This reduction was observed even for the earliest saccades, when selection tends to be most stimulus-driven. When the distractor appeared at the high-probability location, saccadic reaction time was slowed specifically for distractor-going saccades, suggesting a slowing of priority accumulation at this location. In the event that the distractor was fixated, disengagement from the distractor was also faster when it appeared in the high-probability location. Both proactive and reactive mechanisms of distractor suppression work together to minimize attentional capture by frequently encountered distractors.

Benefits from negative templates in easy and difficult search depend on rapid distractor rejection and enhanced guidance

While most research on attentional templates focuses on how attention can be guided toward targets, a growing body of research has been examining our ability to guide attention away from distractors using negative templates. A recent report showed larger reaction time benefits from negative templates during a difficult search task compared to an easy search task. However, it remains unclear what shifts in attentional processing led to these differences in reaction time benefits. In the current study, we tested the predictions of enhanced guidance and rapid rejection as potential explanations for the differential impact of negative templates based on search difficulty. In Experiment 1, we replicated the larger benefits from negative templates in a within-subjects design. In Experiment 2, we use eye tracking to measure the proportion of fixations directed towards target-colored distractors as an index of enhanced guidance and the dwell time on distractors as a measure of rapid rejection. We found more attentional guidance from negative templates in the difficult search condition. In addition, we found larger benefits of rapid rejection from negative templates in the difficult search condition. While we typically focus on templates as a way of guiding attention, these results highlight another key role played by attentional templates: rapid distractor rejection.

Negative cues minimize visual search specificity effects

Prior target knowledge (i.e., positive cues) improves visual search performance. However, there is considerable debate about whether distractor knowledge (i.e., negative cues) can guide search. Some studies suggest the active suppression of negatively cued search items, while others suggest the initial capture of attention by negatively cued items. Prior work has used pictorial or specific text cues but has not explicitly compared them. We build on that work by comparing positive and negative cues presented pictorially and as categorical text labels using photorealistic objects and eye movement measures. Search displays contained a target (cued on positive trials), a lure from the target category (cued on negative trials), and four categorically-unrelated distractors. Search performance with positive cues resulted in stronger attentional guidance and faster object recognition for pictorial relative to categorical cues (i.e., a pictorial advantage, suggesting specific visual details afforded by pictorial cues improved search). However, in most search performance metrics, negative cues mitigate the pictorial advantage. Given that the negatively cued items captured attention, generated target guidance but mitigated the pictorial advantage, these results are partly consistent with both existing theories. Specific visual details provided in positive cues produce a large pictorial advantage in all measures, whereas specific visual details in negative cues only produce a small pictorial advantage for object recognition but not for attentional guidance. This asymmetry in the pictorial advantage suggests that the down-weighting of specific negatively cued visual features is less efficient than the up-weighting of specific positively cued visual features.

Perceptual learning with dichoptic attention tasks improves attentional modulation in V1 and IPS and reduces interocular suppression in human amblyopia

Long-term and chronic visual suppression to the non-preferred eye in early childhood is a key factor in developing amblyopia, as well as a critical barrier to treat amblyopia. To explore the relationship between selective visual attention and amblyopic suppression and its role in the success of amblyopic training, we used EEG source-imaging to show that training human adults with strabismic and anisometropic amblyopia with dichoptic attention tasks improved attentional modulation of neural populations in the primary visual cortex (V1) and intraparietal sulcus (IPS). We also used psychophysics to show that training reduced interocular suppression along with visual acuity and stereoacuity improvements. Importantly, our results revealed that the reduction of interocular suppression by training was significantly correlated with the improvement of selective visual attention in both training-related and -unrelated tasks in the amblyopic eye, relative to the fellow eye. These findings suggest a relation between interocular suppression and selective visual attention bias between eyes in amblyopic vision, and that dichoptic training with high-attention demand tasks in the amblyopic eye might be an effective way to treat amblyopia.

Ten simple rules to study distractor suppression

Distractor suppression refers to the ability to filter out distracting and task-irrelevant information. Distractor suppression is essential for survival and considered a key aspect of selective attention. Despite the recent and rapidly evolving literature on distractor suppression, we still know little about how the brain suppresses distracting information. What limits progress is that we lack mutually agreed upon principles of how to study the neural basis of distractor suppression and its manifestation in behavior. Here, we offer ten simple rules that we believe are fundamental when investigating distractor suppression. We provide guidelines on how to design conclusive experiments on distractor suppression (Rules 1-3), discuss different types of distractor suppression that need to be distinguished (Rules 4-6), and provide an overview of models of distractor suppression and considerations of how to evaluate distractor suppression statistically (Rules 7-10). Together, these rules provide a concise and comprehensive synopsis of promising advances in the field of distractor suppression. Following these rules will propel research on distractor suppression in important ways, not only by highlighting prominent issues to both new and more advanced researchers in the field, but also by facilitating communication between sub-disciplines.

Dynamic causal interactions between occipital and parietal cortex explain how endogenous spatial attention and stimulus-driven salience jointly shape the distribution of processing priorities in 2D visual space

Visuo-spatial attention prioritizes the processing of relevant inputs via different types of signals, including current goals and stimulus salience. Complex mixtures of these signals engage in everyday life situations, but little is known about how these signals jointly modulate distributed patterns of activity across the occipital regions that represent visual space. Here, we measured spatio-topic, quadrant-specific occipital activity during the processing of visual displays containing both task-relevant targets and salient color-singletons. We computed spatial bias vectors indexing the effect of attention in 2D space, as coded by distributed activity in the occipital cortex. We found that goal-directed spatial attention biased activity towards the target and that salience further modulated this endogenous effect: salient distractors decreased the spatial bias, while salient targets increased it. Analyses of effective connectivity revealed that the processing of salient distractors relied on the modulation of the bidirectional connectivity between the occipital and the posterior parietal cortex, as well as the modulation of the lateral interactions within the occipital cortex. These findings demonstrate that goal-directed attention and salience jointly contribute to shaping processing priorities in the occipital cortex and highlight that multiple functional paths determine how spatial information about these signals is distributed across occipital regions.

Testing the underlying processes leading to learned distractor rejection: Learned oculomotor avoidance

Target templates stored in visual memory guide visual attention toward behaviorally relevant target objects. Visual attention also is guided away from nontarget distractors by longer-term learning, a phenomenon termed "learned distractor rejection." Template guidance and learned distractor rejection can occur simultaneously to further increase search efficiency. However, the underlying processes guiding learned distractor rejection are unknown. In two visual search experiments employing eye-tracking, we tested between two plausible processes: proactive versus reactive attentional control. Participants searched through two-color, spatially unsegregated displays. Participants could guide attention by both target templates and consistent nontarget distractors. We observed fewer distractor fixations (including the first eye movement) and shorter distractor dwell times. The data supported a single mechanism of learned distractor rejection, whereby observers adopted a learned, proactive attentional control setting to avoid distraction whenever possible. Further, when distraction occurred, observers rapidly recovered. We term this proactive mechanism "learned oculomotor avoidance." The current study informs theories of visual attention by demonstrating the underlying processes leading to learned distractor suppression during strong target guidance.

Ten simple rules to study distractor suppression

Distractor suppression refers to the ability to filter out distracting and task-irrelevant information. Distractor suppression is essential for survival and considered a key aspect of selective attention. Despite the recent and rapidly evolving literature on distractor suppression, we still know little about how the brain suppresses distracting information. What limits progress is that we lack mutually agreed upon principles of how to study the neural basis of distractor suppression and its manifestation in behavior. Here, we offer ten simple rules that we believe are fundamental when investigating distractor suppression. We provide guidelines on how to design conclusive experiments on distractor suppression (Rules 1–3), discuss different types of distractor suppression that need to be distinguished (Rules 4–6), and provide an overview of models of distractor suppression and considerations of how to evaluate distractor suppression statistically (Rules 7–10). Together, these rules provide a concise and comprehensive synopsis of promising advances in the field of distractor suppression. Following these rules will propel research on distractor suppression in important ways, not only by highlighting prominent issues to both new and more advanced researchers in the field, but also by facilitating communication between sub-disciplines.

•

Distractor suppression is the ability to filter out irrelevant information.

•

At present, we know little about how the brain suppresses distraction.

•

We offer ten rules that are fundamental when investigating distractor suppression.

•

Following the rules will propel research and foster interaction between disciplines.

No evidence for proactive suppression of explicitly cued distractor features

Visual search benefits from advance knowledge of nontarget features. However, it is unknown whether these negatively cued features are suppressed in advance (proactively) or during search (reactively). To test this, we presented color cues varying from trial-to-trial that predicted target or nontarget colors. Experiment 1 (N = 96) showed that both target and nontarget cues speeded search. To test whether attention proactively modified cued feature representations, in Experiment 2 (N = 200), we interleaved color probe and search trials and had participants detect the color of a briefly presented ring that could either match the cued color or not. People detected positively cued colors better than other colors, whereas negatively cued colors were detected no better or worse than other colors. These results demonstrate that nontarget features are not suppressed proactively, and instead suggest that anticipated nontarget features are ignored via reactive mechanisms.

Electrophysiological Evidence for the Suppression of Highly Salient Distractors

There has been a longstanding debate as to whether salient stimuli have the power to involuntarily capture attention. As a potential resolution to this debate, the signal suppression hypothesis proposes that salient items generate a bottom-up signal that automatically attracts attention, but that salient items can be suppressed by top-down mechanisms to prevent attentional capture. Despite much support, the signal suppression hypothesis has been challenged on the grounds that many prior studies may have used color singletons with relatively low salience that are too weak to capture attention. The current study addressed this by using previous methods to study suppression but increased the set size to improve the relative salience of the color singletons. To assess whether salient distractors captured attention, electrophysiological markers of attentional allocation (the N2pc component) and suppression (the PD component) were measured. The results provided no evidence of attentional capture, but instead indicated suppression of the highly salient singleton distractors, as indexed by the PD component. This suppression occurred even though a computational model of saliency confirmed that the color singleton was highly salient. Altogether, this supports the signal suppression hypothesis and is inconsistent with stimulus-driven models of attentional capture.

Ageing and selective inhibition of irrelevant information in an attention-demanding rapid serial visual presentation task

Attention involves both an ability to selectively focus on relevant information and simultaneously ignore irrelevant information (i.e. inhibitory control). Many factors impact inhibitory control such as individual differences, relative timing of stimuli presentation, distractor characteristics, and participant age. Previous research with young adults responding to an attention-demanding rapid serial visual presentations of pictures superimposed with task-irrelevant words evaluated the extent to which unattended information may be subject to inhibitory control. Surprise recognition tests following the rapid serial visual presentation task showed that recognition for unattended words presented with non-targets (i.e. non-aligned or ‘NA’ words) during the rapid serial visual presentation task were recognised at chance levels. However, when the unattended words were infrequently paired with the attended picture targets (i.e. target-aligned or ‘TA’ words), recognition rates were significantly below chance and significantly lower compared to NA words, suggesting selective inhibitory control for the previously unattended TA words. The current study adapted this paradigm to compare healthy younger and older adults’ ability to engage in inhibitory control. In line with previous research, younger adults demonstrated selective inhibition with recognition rates for TA words significantly lower than NA words and chance, while NA words were recognised at chance levels. However, older adults showed no difference in recognition rates between word types (TA versus NA). Rather all items were recognised at rates significantly below chance suggesting inhibited recognition for all unattended words, regardless of when they were presented during the primary task. Finally, older adults recognised significantly fewer NA words compared to young adults. These findings suggest that older adults may experience a decline in their ability to selectively inhibit the processing of irrelevant information, while maintaining the capacity to exercise global inhibition over unattended lexical information.

Is Statistical Learning of a Salient Distractor's Color Implicit, Inflexible and Distinct From Inter-Trial Priming?

Being able to overcome distraction by salient distractors is critical in order to allocate our attention efficiently. Previous research showed that observers can learn to ignore salient distractors endowed with some regularity, such as a high-probability location or feature - a phenomenon known as distractor statistical learning. Unlike goal-directed attentional guidance, the bias induced by statistical learning is thought to be implicit, long-lasting and inflexible. We tested these claims with regard to statistical learning of distractor color in a high-power (N = 160) pre-registered experiment. Participants searched for a known-shape singleton target and a color singleton distractor, when present, appeared most often in one color during the learning phase, but equally often in all possible colors during the extinction phase. We used a sensitive measure of participants' awareness of the probability manipulation. The awareness test was administered after the extinction phase for one group, and after the leaning phase for another group - which was informed that the probability imbalance would be discontinued in the upcoming extinction phase. Participants learned to suppress the high-probability distractor color very fast, an effect partly due to intertrial priming. Crucially, there was only little evidence that the bias survived during extinction. Awareness of the manipulation was associated with reduced color suppression, suggesting that the bias was implicit. Finally, results showed that the awareness test was more sensitive when administered early vs. late. We conclude that learnt color suppression is an implicit bias that emerges and decays rapidly, and discuss the methodological implications of our findings.

EXPRESS: High Bladder Pressure Reduces the Ability to Filter Out Interference From Distractors in Low Perceptual Load Condition

According to the load theory of attention, an active cognitive control mechanism is needed to ensure that behavior is controlled by target-relevant information when distractors are also perceived. Although the active cognitive control mechanism consists of working memory, cognitive flexibility, and inhibition components, predictions regarding the load effects of this mechanism were derived mostly from studies on working memory. We aimed to test whether these predictions are also valid for an inhibition component. The inhibitory load was manipulated physiologically by creating different bladder pressure and its effects on distractor interference were examined under low and high perceptual load conditions. Results indicated that the availability of inhibitory control resources was important for decreasing the interference of distractors in the low perceptual load condition and that the high perceptual load reduced the effects of distractors independently from the availability of inhibitory resources. Results were consistent with the predictions of load theory, and to the best of our knowledge, the study provided the first piece of evidence in terms of the load effect of inhibition component on distractor interference.

Stimulus novelty and emotionality interact in the processing of visual distractors

Novel distractors are prioritized for attentional selection. When distractors also convey emotional content, they divert attention from the primary task more than neutral stimuli do. In the present study, while participants were engaged in a central task, we examined the impact of peripheral distractors that varied for emotional content and novelty. Results showed that emotional interference on reaction times completely habituated with repetition and promptly recovered with novelty. The enhanced LPP for emotional pictures was attenuated by repetitions and, interestingly, stimulus novelty only affected emotional, but not neutral distractors, in both the RTs and LPP. Alpha-ERD was similarly reduced for repeated emotional and neutral distractors. Altogether, these findings suggest that the impact of peripheral distractors can be attenuated through a non-strategic learning mechanism mediated by mere stimulus repetition, which is fine-tuned to detect changes in emotional distractors only, supporting the hypothesis that novelty and emotion share the same motivational circuits.

Shielding working-memory representations from temporally predictable external interference

Protecting working-memory content from distracting external sensory inputs and intervening tasks is an ubiquitous demand in daily life. Here, we ask whether and how temporal expectations about external events can help mitigate effects of such interference during working-memory retention. We manipulated the temporal predictability of interfering items that occurred during the retention period of a visual working-memory task and report that temporal expectations reduce the detrimental influence of external interference on subsequent memory performance. Moreover, to determine if the protective effects of temporal expectations rely on distractor suppression or involve shielding of internal representations, we compared effects after irrelevant distractors that could be ignored vs. interrupters that required a response. Whereas distractor suppression may be sufficient to confer protection from predictable distractors, any benefits after interruption are likely to involve memory shielding. We found similar benefits of temporal expectations after both types of interference. We conclude that temporal expectations may play an important role in safeguarding behaviour based on working memory - acting through mechanisms that include the shielding of internal content from external interference.

Distractor filtering and its electrophysiological correlates in schizophrenia

OBJECTIVE

Patients with schizophrenia are characterized by compromised working memory (WM) performance and increased distractibility. Theta synchronization (especially over the frontal midline areas) is related to cognitive control and executive processes during WM encoding and retention. Alpha event-related desynchronization (ERD) is associated with information processing and attention.

METHODS

Participants (35 patients and 39 matched controls) performed a modified Sternberg WM task, containing salient and non-salient distractor items in the retention period. A high-density 128 channel EEG was recorded during the task. Theta (4-7 Hz) and fast alpha (10-13 Hz) event-related spectral perturbation (ERSP) were analyzed during the retention and encoding period.

RESULTS

Patients with schizophrenia showed worse WM performance and increased attentional distractibility in terms of lower hit rates and increased distractor-related commission errors compared to healthy controls. Theta synchronization was modulated by condition (learning vs. distractor) in both groups but it was modulated by salience only in controls. Furthermore, salience of distractors modulated less the fast alpha ERD in patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that patients with schizophrenia process salient and non-salient distracting information less efficiently and show weaker cognitive control compared to controls.

SIGNIFICANCE

These differences may partly account for diminished WM performance and increased distractibility in schizophrenia.

Prefrontal Control of Proactive and Reactive Mechanisms of Visual Suppression

In everyday life, we are continuously struggling at focusing on our current goals while at the same time avoiding distractions. Attention is the neuro-cognitive process devoted to the selection of behaviorally relevant sensory information while at the same time preventing distraction by irrelevant information. Distraction can be prevented proactively, by strategically prioritizing task-relevant information at the expense of irrelevant information, or reactively, by suppressing the ongoing processing of distractors. The distinctive neuronal signature of these suppressive mechanisms is still largely unknown. Thanks to machine-learning decoding methods applied to prefrontal cortical activity, we monitor the dynamic spatial attention with an unprecedented spatial and temporal resolution. We first identify independent behavioral and neuronal signatures for long-term (learning-based spatial prioritization) and short-term (dynamic spatial attention) mechanisms. We then identify distinct behavioral and neuronal signatures for proactive and reactive suppression mechanisms. We find that while distracting task-relevant information is suppressed proactively, task-irrelevant information is suppressed reactively. Critically, we show that distractor suppression, whether proactive or reactive, strongly depends on the implementation of both long-term and short-term mechanisms of selection. Overall, we provide a unified neuro-cognitive framework describing how the prefrontal cortex deals with distractors in order to flexibly optimize behavior in dynamic environments.