Threefold effect of peripheral precues: alertness, orienting, and response tendencies

Making a saccade enhances Stroop and Simon conflict control

Cognitive control is an important ability instantiated in many situations such as conflict control (e.g., Stroop/Simon task) and the control of eye movements (e.g., saccades). However, it is unclear whether eye movement control shares a common cognitive control system with the conflict control. In Experiment 1, we asked participants to make a prosaccade or antisaccade and then to identify the color of a lateralized color word (i.e., a Stroop-Simon stimulus). The stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between the saccadic cue and the Stroop-Simon stimulus was manipulated to be either short (200 ms) or long (600 ms). Results showed that the Stroop effect at the response level and the (negative) Simon effect were smaller when the SOA was short than long, demonstrating a decline of response control over time after making a saccade. Moreover, this temporal change of the Simon effect was more pronounced in the antisaccade session than in the prosaccade session. Furthermore, individuals who had better performance in the antisaccade task performed better in the response control of Stroop interference. When the saccade task was removed in Experiment 2, the temporal declines of the response control observed in Experiment 1 were absent. Experiment 3 replicated the key results of Experiment 1 by replacing the Stroop-Simon task with a typical Simon task and separately testing the typical Stroop and Simon tasks. Overall, our findings suggest that a common system is shared between the control of eye movements and the conflict control at the response level.

The Simon effect in a discrete sequence production task: Key-specific stimuli cannot be ignored due to attentional capture

Two experiments examined whether practicing discrete key pressing sequences eventually leads to a disregard of the key-specific stimuli, as suggested by sequence learning models, or whether these stimuli continue to be relied upon because the associated luminance increase attracts visuospatial attention. Participants practiced two sequences by reacting to two fixed series of seven letter stimuli, each displayed at a location that did or did not correspond with the required response location. Stimulus use was indicated by a Simon effect in that key presses were slowed when stimulus and key locations did not correspond. Experiment 1 demonstrated that letter stimuli continued to be used as the Simon effect occurred with each sequence element, and this remained quite stable across practice and did not differ for familiar and unfamiliar sequences. Experiment 2 showed that the Simon effect remained present even with meaningless stimuli that were often even harmful. These findings suggest that even in motor sequences that can be executed without element-specific stimuli attention attraction enforces stimulus use. The data further supported the assumptions that S-R translation and sequencing systems are racing to trigger individual responses, and that explicit sequence representations include spatial and verbal knowledge.

Response Inhibition Can Affect Reaction Time to Abrupt-Onset Visual Displays

Reaction time (RT) to abrupt-onset stimuli has been widely used for more than a century to measure the duration of perceptuo-cognitive and motor processes [Donders, 1868/1969 Attention and Performance II (1969 Acta Psychologica30 412–431)]. A complicating factor with the RT method is that of response withholding, or response inhibition (RI). The occurrence of RI (under this or other names) has been widely discussed in relation to studies of motor processes but has been largely ignored in relation to studies of perceptuo-cognitive processes. We demonstrate that RI can be a confounding factor when RT to abrupt-onset displays is used to study perceptual and cognitive processes. In experiment 1, new-object targets were more accurately detected than old-object targets in an unspeeded task, but were responded to more slowly in an RT task. Consistent with an interpretation in terms of RI, this pattern of results was dependent on the difficulty of target detection. The data of three further experiments also support predictions from the RI interpretation. It is suggested that RI may be an under-acknowledged factor in RT studies of perceptual and cognitive processes with abrupt-onset displays.

Comparing the effects of sustained and transient spatial attention on the orienting towards and the processing of electrical nociceptive stimuli

We examined whether sustained vs. transient spatial attention differentially affect the processing of electrical nociceptive stimuli. Cued nociceptive stimuli of a relevant intensity (low or high) on the left or right forearm required a foot pedal press. The cued side varied trial wise in the transient attention condition, while it remained constant during a series of trials in the sustained attention condition. The orienting phase preceding the nociceptive stimuli was examined by focusing on lateralized EEG activity. ERPs were computed to examine the influence of spatial attention on the processing of the nociceptive stimuli. Results for the orienting phase showed increased ipsilateral alpha and beta power above somatosensory areas in both the transient and the sustained attention conditions, which may reflect inhibition of ipsilateral and/or disinhibition of contralateral somatosensory areas. Cued nociceptive stimuli evoked a larger N130 than uncued stimuli, both in the transient and the sustained attention conditions. Support for increased efficiency of spatial attention in the sustained attention condition was obtained for the N180 and the P540 component. We concluded that spatial attention is more efficient in the case of sustained than in the case of transient spatial attention.

Bias for the Left Visual Field in Rapid Serial Visual Presentation: Effects of Additional Salient Cues Suggest a Critical Role of Attention

Everyday experience suggests that people are equally aware of stimuli in both hemifields. However, when two streams of stimuli are rapidly presented left and right, the second target (T2) is better identified in the left hemifield than in the right hemifield. This left visual field (LVF) advantage may result from differences between hemifields in attracting attention. Therefore, we introduced a visual cue shortly before T2 onset to draw attention to one stream. Thus, to identify T2, attention was correctly positioned with valid cues but had to be redirected to the other stream with invalid ones. If the LVF advantage is caused by differences between hemifields in attracting attention, invalid cues should increase, and valid cues should reduce the LVF advantage as compared with neutral cues. This prediction was confirmed. ERP analysis revealed that cues evoked an early posterior negativity, confirming that attention was attracted by the cue. This negativity was earlier with cues in the LVF, which suggests that responses to salient events are faster in the right hemisphere than in the left hemisphere. Valid cues speeded up, and invalid cues delayed T2-evoked N2pc; in addition, valid cues enlarged T2-evoked P3. After N2pc, right-side T2 evoked more sustained contralateral negativity than left T2, least long-lasting after valid cues. Difficulties in identifying invalidly cued right T2 were reflected in prematurely ending P3 waveforms. Overall, these data provide evidence that the LVF advantage is because of different abilities of the hemispheres in shifting attention to relevant events in their contralateral hemifield.

Time-course of hemispheric preference for processing contralateral relevant shapes: P1pc, N1pc, N2pc, N3pc

A most sensitive and specific electrophysiological indicator of selective processing of visual stimuli is the N2pc component. N2pc is a negative EEG potential peaking 250 ms after stimulus onset, recorded from posterior sites contralateral to relevant stimuli. Additional deflections preceding or following N2pc have been obtained in previous studies, possibly produced by specific stimulus features or specific prime-target sequences. To clarify the entire time-course of the contralateral- ipsilateral (C-I) difference recorded from the scalp above visual cortex in response to left-right pairs of targets and distracters, C-I differences were here compared between two types of stimuli and between stimuli that were or were not preceded by masked neutral primes. The C-I difference waveform consisted of several peaks, termed here P1pc (60-100 ms after target onset), N1pc (120-160 ms), N2pc (220-280 ms), and N3pc (360-400 ms). Being markedly enhanced when stimuli were preceded by the neutral primes, P1pc may indicate a response to stimulus change. Also, when stimuli were primed, N2pc reached its peak earlier, thereby tending to merge with N1pc. N3pc seemed to increase when target discrimination was difficult. N1pc, N2pc, and N3pc appear as three periods of one process. N3pc probably corresponds to L400 or SPCN as described in other studies. These observations suggest that the neurophysiological basis of stimulus-driven focusing of attention on target stimuli is a process that lasts for hundreds of milliseconds, with the relevant hemisphere being activated in an oscillating manner as long as required by the task.

Contextual cueing effects despite spatially cued target locations

Reaction times (RT) to targets are faster in repeated displays relative to novel ones when the spatial arrangement of the distracting items predicts the target location (contextual cueing). It is assumed that visual-spatial attention is guided more efficiently to the target resulting in reduced RTs. In the present experiment, contextual cueing even occurred when the target location was previously peripherally cued. Electrophysiologically, repeated displays elicited an enhanced N2pc component in both conditions and resulted in an earlier onset of the stimulus-locked lateralized readiness potential (s-LRP) in the cued condition and in an enhanced P3 in the uncued condition relative to novel displays. These results indicate that attentional guidance is less important than previously assumed but that other cognitive processes, such as attentional selection (N2pc) and response-related processes (s-LRP, P3) are facilitated by context familiarity.

Endogenous orienting modulates the Simon effect: critical factors in experimental design

Responses are faster when the side of stimulus and response correspond than when they do not correspond, even if stimulus location is irrelevant to the task at hand: the correspondence, spatial compatibility effect, or Simon effect. Generally, it is assumed that an automatically generated spatial code is responsible for this effect, but the precise mechanism underlying the formation of this code is still under dispute. Two major alternatives have been proposed: the referential-coding account, which can be subdivided into a static version and an attention-centered version, and the attention-shift account. These accounts hold clear-cut predictions for attentional cuing experiments. The former would assume a Simon effect irrespective of attentional cuing in its static version, whereas the attention-centered version of the referential-coding account and the attention-shift account would predict a decreased Simon effect on validly as opposed to invalid cued trials. However, results from previous studies are equivocal to the effects of attentional cuing on the Simon effect. We argue here that attentional cueing reliably modulates the Simon effect if some crucial experimental conditions, mostly relevant for optimizing attentional allocation, are met. Furthermore, we propose that the Simon effect may be better understood within the perspective of supra-modal spatial attention, thereby providing an explanation for observed discrepancies in the literature.

Evidence from a response choice task reveals a selection bias in the attentional cueing paradigm

In a typical attentional cueing paradigm, irrelevant peripheral cues produce early facilitation (fast responses) followed by later inhibition (slow responses) to cued locations. Here we examine whether cues not only influence the speed with which responses are produced, but also impact or bias which location is ultimately selected as requiring a response. Specifically, can cues influence not only the speed with which we respond but also influence the behavior produced? To examine this question, a choice localization task was used in which no targets were presented, and subjects were asked to choose which effector (left hand, right hand) to use in response to a centrally presented tone. Thus, following either a left or right peripheral cue, and then a central tone, subjects were free to respond with either their left or right hand. Early facilitation and later inhibition with this choice procedure were found in both response times and the proportion of responses to the cued and uncued locations. These results suggest that there are processes which initially bias response selection toward cued locations and then subsequently bias response selection away from cued locations.

Cueing method biases in visual detection studies

Questions about attention are usually addressed by cueing tasks assessing whether knowledge of stimulus-related information provided in advance will improve target processing. Here, we test the reliability of this classical paradigm by means of using neutral cues in a simple visual detection task. We compared "mixed-block" (cued/no-cued trials are intermixed in the same block of trials) to "pure-block" (cued/no-cued trials are presented separately) protocols. We report converging evidence with behavioral and fMRI experiments that cueing methods entail competing processes of automatic motor activation (triggered by the cue) and proactive response inhibition (intended to counteract automatic responses to the cue). This competition strongly affects the reaction time baseline necessary to measure the "cueing" effect in a mixed-block design. Indeed, in such a protocol, proactive inhibition cannot be released before target presentation. Accordingly, we suggest that this design inevitably leads to biases in interpreting cueing data, and that the effects classically observed with mixed-block protocols are likely to be artifacts that are not attentional in origin. We conclude that the identification of this methodological issue now calls for a reassessment of the theoretical framework used to interpret some cueing effects with respect to their control baseline.

Different effects of exogenous cues in a visual detection and discrimination task: delayed attention withdrawal and/or speeded motor inhibition?

Several studies examining spatial attention have found a discrepancy regarding the effects of exogenous cues on reaction times in visual detection and discrimination tasks. Namely, across a wide range of cue-target intervals, responses are slower for targets at cued than at uncued locations (inhibition of return) in detection tasks, whereas responses are faster for targets at cued than at uncued locations (facilitation) in discrimination tasks. Two hypotheses were proposed to account for this discrepancy. First, attention may dwell much longer on the exogenously cued location in discrimination tasks because stimuli have to be identified (i.e., the delayed attention withdrawal hypothesis). Secondly, due to increased motor preparation in detection tasks, cue-induced motor inhibition may rise much faster in these tasks than in discrimination tasks (i.e., the speeded motor inhibition hypothesis). We examined to what extent these hypotheses can account for effects of exogenous cues in a detection and discrimination task on the extrastriate P1 component, and the onset of motor activation, as indexed by the lateralized readiness potential. Some support was found for the delayed attention withdrawal hypothesis, as task-dependent cueing effects were found on the P1 component. Other aspects of our data, however, indicate that motor inhibition is also involved. Based on these findings, we propose that effects of exogenous cues in detection and discrimination tasks are determined by the interplay between two mechanisms, of which the time courses of activation may be modulated by the specific setting.

Spatial attention triggered by unimodal, crossmodal, and bimodal exogenous cues: a comparison of reflexive orienting mechanisms

The aim of this study was to establish whether spatial attention triggered by bimodal exogenous cues acts differently as compared to unimodal and crossmodal exogenous cues due to crossmodal integration. In order to investigate this issue, we examined cuing effects in discrimination tasks and compared these effects in a condition wherein a visual target was preceded by both visual and auditory exogenous cues delivered simultaneously at the same side (bimodal cue), with conditions wherein the visual target was preceded by either a visual (unimodal cue) or an auditory cue (crossmodal cue). The results of two experiments revealed that cuing effects on RTs in these three conditions with an SOA of 200 ms had comparable magnitudes. Differences at a longer SOA of 600 ms (inhibition of return for bimodal cues, Experiment 1) disappeared when catch trials were included (in Experiment 2). The current data do not support an additional influence of crossmodal integration on exogenous orienting, but are well in agreement with the existence of a supramodal spatial attention module that allocates attentional resources towards stimulated locations for different sensory modalities.

Relative contribution of expectancy and immediate arousal to the facilitatory effect of an auditory accessory stimulus

An auditory stimulus speeds up a digital response to a subsequent visual stimulus. This facilitatory effect has been related to the expectancy and the immediate arousal that would be caused by the accessory stimulus. The present study examined the relative contribution of these two influences. In a first and a third experiment a simple reaction time task was used. In a second and fourth experiment a go/no-go reaction time task was used. In each of these experiments, the accessory stimulus preceded the target stimulus by 200 ms for one group of male and female volunteers (GFix). For another group of similar volunteers (GVar) the accessory stimulus preceded the target stimulus by 200 ms in 25% of the trials, by 1000 ms in 25% of the trials and was not followed by the target stimulus in 50% of the trials (Experiments 1a and 1b) or preceded the target stimulus by 200 ms in 6% of the trials and by 1000 ms in 94% of the trials (Experiments 2a and 2b). There was a facilitatory effect of the accessory stimulus for GFix in the four experiments. There was also a facilitatory effect of the accessory stimulus at the 200-ms stimulus onset asynchrony for GVar in Experiments 1a and 1b but not in Experiments 2a and 2b. The facilitatory effects observed were larger in the go/no-go task than in the simple task. Taken together, these results suggest that expectancy is much more important than immediate arousal for the improvement of performance caused by an accessory stimulus.

Mechanisms underlying spatial coding in a multiple-item Simon task

Choice responses are faster when target position and response side correspond than when they do not, even if target position is response-irrelevant. This "Simon effect" has also been observed in case of multi-item arrays. Generally, it is assumed that an automatically generated spatial response code is responsible for the effect. The referential-coding account assumes that this code is directly related to the target, although the moment of production of the code is not fully clear. The attention-shift account assumes that the code is directly related to the direction of the most recent attentional shift. An experiment was performed in which left or right target locations were indicated by arrows occurring before (precue), simultaneous with (simcue), or after (postcue) six-element arrays. Overt responses and EEG potentials were recorded. The Simon effect was present in all conditions, and decreased when responses were slower. No relation was found between amplitude of posterior lateralized components and the magnitude of the Simon effect. A posterior contralateral negativity was also found after presenting the arrays in the precue condition, which might reflect the reorienting of attention toward the target position. The results are more favorable to the referential-coding account although this account becomes very similar to the attention-shift hypothesis as the moment of formation of the spatial response code is related to effective target onset rather than to stimulus onset.

The attentional effects of peripheral cueing as revealed by two event-related potential studies

OBJECTIVE

The mechanism of visual spatial attention elicited by peripheral cueing was investigated in two studies.

METHOD

Event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded when the subjects were performing a spatial frequency discrimination task and a location discrimination task. Stimuli were randomly flashed in the left or right visual field. Prior to each stimulus a peripheral cue was presented with a validity of 75%.

RESULTS

The subjects responded faster to valid trials than to invalid trials. The earliest visual ERP component, C1, was not modulated by the cue validity, suggesting that visual spatial attention elicited by peripheral cueing does not involve striate cortex. Valid trials elicited larger contralateral P1 but a smaller contralateral N1 than invalid trials. The early onsets of these attentional effects show that spatial attention affects stimulus processing at early sensory/perceptual stages. The latencies of contralateral P1 and contralateral N1 were shorter for invalid trials, however. The ipsilateral N1 was enhanced by valid trials in the spatial frequency discrimination task but was not in the location discrimination task, whereas the contralateral N1 was larger for invalid trials than for valid trials in both tasks.

CONCLUSION

The results indicate that involuntary allocation of attention involves different mechanisms from voluntary allocation of attention.

The influence of peripheral precues on the tendency to react towards a lateral relevant stimulus with multiple-item arrays

Responses are faster when the side of the stimulus and response correspond than when they do not correspond. This has been ascribed to the influence of a spatial code on response selection. Regarding the origin of this code, three hypotheses were proposed that all assume that spatial codes decay as a function of time: the attention shift hypothesis, the static reference hypothesis, and the dynamic reference hypothesis. Arrays (a target among five distractors) requiring left or right responses, were preceded by peripheral cues indicating either the target position, the side of the target, or all array positions. Reaction times (RT), proportions correct, the response-locked lateralized readiness potential (LRP), and RT distributions were examined. A correspondence effect was present on RTs when all positions or the relevant side were cued, independently of response speed. No correspondence effect was found when the cue indicated the target position. The LRP results indicate that the correspondence effect is at least partially due to an effect at the level of motor preparation. The results favor the attention shift hypothesis which assumes that spatial codes are generated whenever there is a shift of attention.