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

Aging impairs reactive attentional control but not proactive distractor inhibition

Older adults tend to be more prone to distraction compared with young adults, and this age-related deficit has been attributed to a deficiency in inhibitory processing. However, recent findings challenge the notion that aging leads to global impairments in inhibition. To reconcile these mixed findings, we investigated how aging modulates multiple mechanisms of attentional control by tracking the timing and direction of eye movements. When engaged in feature-search mode and proactive distractor suppression, older adults made fewer first fixations to the target but inhibited the task-irrelevant salient distractor as effectively as did young adults. However, when engaged in singleton-search mode and required to reactively disengage from the distractor, older adults made significantly more first saccades toward the task-irrelevant salient distractor and showed increased fixation times in orienting to the target, longer dwell times on incorrect saccades, and increased saccadic reaction times compared with young adults. Our findings reveal that aging differently impairs attentional control depending on whether visual search requires proactive distractor suppression or reactive distractor disengagement. Furthermore, our oculomotor measures reveal both age-related deficits and age equivalence in various mechanisms of attention, including goal-directed orienting, selection history, disengagement, and distractor inhibition. These findings help explain why conclusions of age-related declines or age equivalence in mechanisms of attentional control are task specific and reveal that older adults do not exhibit global impairments in mechanisms of inhibition. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Attentional suppression of dynamic versus static salient distractors

Attention must be carefully controlled to avoid distraction by salient stimuli. The signal suppression hypothesis proposes that salient stimuli can be proactively suppressed to prevent distraction. Although this hypothesis has garnered much support, most previous studies have used one class of salient distractors: color singletons. It therefore remains unclear whether other kinds of salient distractors can also be suppressed. The current study directly compared suppression of a variety of salient stimuli using an attentional capture task that was adapted for eye tracking. The working hypothesis was that static salient stimuli (e.g., color singletons) would be easier to suppress than dynamic salient stimuli (e.g., motion singletons). The results showed that participants could ignore a wide variety of salient distractors. Importantly, suppression was weaker and slower to develop for dynamic salient stimuli than static salient stimuli. A final experiment revealed that adding a static salient feature to a dynamic motion distractor greatly improved suppression. Altogether, the results suggest that an underlying inhibitory process is applied to all kinds of salient distractors, but that suppression is more readily applied to static features than dynamic features.

Distinct mechanisms of attentional suppression: exploration of trait factors underlying cued- and learned-suppression

Attention allows us to focus on relevant information while ignoring distractions. Effective suppression of distracting information is crucial for efficient visual search. Recent studies have developed two paradigms to investigate attentional suppression: cued-suppression which is based on top-down control, and learned-suppression which is based on selection history. While both types of suppression reportedly engage proactive control, it remains unclear whether they rely on shared mechanisms. This study aimed to determine the relationship between cued- and learned-suppression. In a within-subjects design, 54 participants performed a cued-suppression task where pre-cues indicated upcoming target or distractor colors, and a learned-suppression task where a salient color distractor was present or absent. No significant correlation emerged between performance in the two tasks, suggesting distinct suppression mechanisms. Cued-suppression correlated with visual working memory capacity, indicating reliance on explicit control. In contrast, learned-suppression correlated with everyday distractibility, suggesting implicit control based on regularities. These results provide evidence for heterogeneous proactive control mechanisms underlying cued- and learned-suppression. While both engage inhibition, cued-suppression relies on deliberate top-down control modulated by working memory, whereas learned-suppression involves implicit suppression shaped by selection history and distractibility traits.

Identifying individual's distractor suppression using functional connectivity between anatomical large-scale brain regions

Distractor suppression (DS) is crucial in goal-oriented behaviors, referring to the ability to suppress irrelevant information. Current evidence points to the prefrontal cortex as an origin region of DS, while subcortical, occipital, and temporal regions are also implicated. The present study aimed to examine the contribution of communications between these brain regions to visual DS. To do it, we recruited two independent cohorts of participants for the study. One cohort participated in a visual search experiment where a salient distractor triggering distractor suppression to measure their DS and the other cohort filled out a Cognitive Failure Questionnaire to assess distractibility in daily life. Both cohorts collected resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI) data to investigate function connectivity (FC) underlying DS. First, we generated predictive models of the DS measured in visual search task using resting-state functional connectivity between large anatomical regions. It turned out that the models could successfully predict individual's DS, indicated by a significant correlation between the actual and predicted DS (r = 0.32, p < 0.01). Importantly, Prefrontal-Temporal, Insula-Limbic and Parietal-Occipital connections contributed to the prediction model. Furthermore, the model could also predict individual's daily distractibility in the other independent cohort (r = -0.34, p < 0.05). Our findings showed the efficiency of the predictive models of distractor suppression encompassing connections between large anatomical regions and highlighted the importance of the communications between attention-related and visual information processing regions in distractor suppression. Current findings may potentially provide neurobiological markers of visual distractor suppression.

Aberrant reward learning, but not negative reinforcement learning, is related to depressive symptoms: an attentional perspective

BACKGROUND

Aberrant reward functioning is implicated in depression. While attention precedes behavior and guides higher-order cognitive processes, reward learning from an attentional perspective - the effects of prior reward-learning on subsequent attention allocation - has been mainly overlooked.

METHODS

The present study explored the effects of reward-based attentional learning in depression using two separate, yet complimentary, studies. In study 1, participants with high (HD) and low (LD) levels of depression symptoms were trained to divert their gaze toward one type of stimuli over another using a novel gaze-contingent music reward paradigm - music played when fixating the desired stimulus type and stopped when gazing the alternate one. Attention allocation was assessed before, during, and following training. In study 2, using negative reinforcement, the same attention allocation pattern was trained while substituting the appetitive music reward for gazing the desired stimulus type with the removal of an aversive sound (i.e. white noise).

RESULTS

In study 1 both groups showed the intended shift in attention allocation during training (online reward learning), while generalization of learning at post-training was only evident among LD participants. Conversely, in study 2 both groups showed post-training generalization. Results were maintained when introducing anxiety as a covariate, and when using a more powerful sensitivity analysis. Finally, HD participants showed higher learning speed than LD participants during initial online learning, but only when using negative, not positive, reinforcement.

CONCLUSIONS

Deficient generalization of learning characterizes the attentional system of HD individuals, but only when using reward-based positive reinforcement, not negative reinforcement.

The effects of eccentricity on attentional capture

Visual attention may be captured by an irrelevant yet salient distractor, thereby slowing search for a relevant target. This phenomenon has been widely studied using the additional singleton paradigm in which search items are typically all presented at one and the same eccentricity. Yet, differences in eccentricity may well bias the competition between target and distractor. Here we investigate how attentional capture is affected by the relative eccentricities of a target and a distractor. Participants searched for a shape-defined target in a grid of homogeneous nontargets of the same color. On 75% of trials, one of the nontarget items was replaced by a salient color-defined distractor. Crucially, target and distractor eccentricities were independently manipulated across three levels of eccentricity (i.e., near, middle, and far). Replicating previous work, we show that the presence of a distractor slows down search. Interestingly, capture as measured by manual reaction times was not affected by target and distractor eccentricity, whereas capture as measured by the eyes was: items close to fixation were more likely to be selected than items presented further away. Furthermore, the effects of target and distractor eccentricity were largely additive, suggesting that the competition between saliency- and relevance-driven selection was modulated by an independent eccentricity-based spatial component. Implications of the dissociation between manual and oculomotor responses are also discussed.

The role of salience in the suppression of distracting stimuli

Researchers have long debated whether salient distractors have the power to automatically capture attention. Recent research has suggested a potential resolution, called the signal suppression hypothesis, whereby salient distractors produce a bottom-up salience signal, but can be suppressed to prevent visual distraction. This account, however, has been criticized on the grounds that previous studies may have used distractors that were only weakly salient. This claim has been difficult to empirically test because there are currently no well-established measures of salience. The current study addresses this by introducing a psychophysical technique to measure salience. First, we generated displays that aimed to manipulate the salience of two color singletons via color contrast. We then verified that this manipulation was successful using a psychophysical technique to determine the minimum exposure duration required to detect each color singleton. The key finding was that high-contrast singletons were detected at briefer exposure thresholds than low-contrast singletons, suggesting that high-contrast singletons were more salient. Next, we evaluated the participants' ability to ignore these singletons in a task in which they were task irrelevant. The results showed that, if anything, high-salience singletons were more strongly suppressed than low-salience singletons. These results generally support the signal suppression hypothesis and refute claims that highly salient singletons cannot be ignored.

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.

Age-related differences in frontoparietal activation for target and distractor singletons during visual search

Age-related decline in visual search performance has been associated with different patterns of activation in frontoparietal regions using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), but whether these age-related effects represent specific influences of target and distractor processing is unclear. Therefore, we acquired event-related fMRI data from 68 healthy, community-dwelling adults ages 18-78 years, during both conjunction (T/F target among rotated Ts and Fs) and feature (T/F target among Os) search. Some displays contained a color singleton that could correspond to either the target or a distractor. A diffusion decision analysis indicated age-related increases in sensorimotor response time across all task conditions, but an age-related decrease in the rate of evidence accumulation (drift rate) was specific to conjunction search. Moreover, the color singleton facilitated search performance when occurring as a target and disrupted performance when occurring as a distractor, but only during conjunction search, and these effects were independent of age. The fMRI data indicated that decreased search efficiency for conjunction relative to feature search was evident as widespread frontoparietal activation. Activation within the left insula mediated the age-related decrease in drift rate for conjunction search, whereas this relation in the FEF and parietal cortex was significant only for individuals younger than 30 or 44 years, respectively. Finally, distractor singletons were associated with significant parietal activation, whereas target singletons were associated with significant frontoparietal deactivation, and this latter effect increased with adult age. Age-related differences in frontoparietal activation therefore reflect both the overall efficiency of search and the enhancement from salient targets.

Which processes dominate visual search: Bottom-up feature contrast, top-down tuning or trial history?

Previous research has identified three mechanisms that guide visual attention: bottom-up feature contrasts, top-down tuning, and the trial history (e.g., priming effects). However, only few studies have simultaneously examined all three mechanisms. Hence, it is currently unclear how they interact or which mechanisms dominate over others. With respect to local feature contrasts, it has been claimed that a pop-out target can only be selected immediately in dense displays when the target has a high local feature contrast, but not when the displays are sparse, which leads to an inverse set-size effect. The present study critically evaluated this view by systematically varying local feature contrasts (i.e., set size), top-down knowledge, and the trial history in pop-out search. We used eye tracking to distinguish between early selection and later identification-related processes. The results revealed that early visual selection was mainly dominated by top-down knowledge and the trial history: When attention was biased to the target feature, either by valid pre-cueing (top-down) or automatic priming, the target could be localised immediately, regardless of display density. Bottom-up feature contrasts only modulated selection when the target was unknown and attention was biased to the non-targets. We also replicated the often-reported finding of reliable feature contrast effects in the mean RTs, but showed that these were due to later, target identification processes (e.g., in the target dwell times). Thus, contrary to the prevalent view, bottom-up feature contrasts in dense displays do not seem to directly guide attention, but only facilitate nontarget rejection, probably by facilitating nontarget grouping.

Statistical learning of target location and distractor location rely on different mechanisms during visual search

More studies have demonstrated that people have the capacity to learn and make use of environmental regularities. This capacity is known as statistical learning (SL). Despite rich empirical findings, it is not clear how the two forms of SL (SL of target location and SL of distractor location) influence visual search and whether they rely on the shared cognitive mechanism. In Experiment 1 and Experiment 2, we manipulated the probability of target location and the probability of distractor location, respectively. The results suggest that attentional guidance (they referred to overt attention) may mainly contribute to the SL effect of the target location and the distractor location, which is in line with the notion of priority mapping. To a small extent, facilitation of response selection may also contribute to the SL effect of the target location but does not contribute to the SL effect of the distractor location. However, the main difference between the two kinds of SL occurred in the early stage (it involved covert attention). Together, our findings indicate that the two forms of SL reflect partly shared and partly independent cognitive mechanisms.

Dynamics of attentional allocation to targets and distractors during visual search

There is much debate about the neural mechanisms that achieve suppression of salient distracting stimuli during visual search. The proactive suppression hypothesis asserts that if exposed to the same distractors repeatedly, these stimuli are actively inhibited before attention can be shifted to them. A contrasting proposal holds that attention is initially captured by salient distractors but is subsequently withdrawn. By concurrently measuring stimulus-driven and intrinsic brain potentials in 36 healthy human participants, we obtained converging evidence against early proactive suppression of distracting input. Salient distractors triggered negative event-related potentials (N1pc/N2pc), enhanced the steady-state visual evoked potential (SSVEP) relative to non-salient (filler) stimuli, and suppressed contralateral relative to ipsilateral alpha-band amplitudes-three electrophysiological measure associated with the allocation of attention-even though these distractors did not interfere with behavioral responses to the search targets. Furthermore, these measures indicated that both stimulus-driven and goal-driven allocations of attention occurred in conjunction with one another, with the goal-driven effect enhancing and prolonging the stimulus-driven effect. These results provide a new perspective on the traditional dichotomy between bottom-up and top-down attentional allocation. Control experiments revealed that continuous marking of the locations at which the search display items were presented resulted in a dramatic and unexpected conversion of the target-elicited N2pc into a shorter-latency N1pc in association with faster reaction times to the targets.

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.

Attentional disengagement effect based on relevant features

In visual search tasks, distractors similar to the target can attract our attention and affect the speed of attentional disengagement. The attentional disengagement refers to shifting attention away from stimuli that are not relevant to the task. Previous studies mainly focused on the attentional disengagement of one feature dimension. However, the mechanisms of different feature dimensions on attentional disengagement in single and conjunction visual search remain unclear. In the current study, we adopted the oculomotor disengagement paradigm and used saccade latency as an indicator to explore the effects of different feature dimensions of center stimuli on attentional disengagement. In both single and conjunction feature search tasks, participants began each search by fixating on a center stimulus that appeared simultaneously with search display but would not be the target. Participants were instructed to ensure the first saccade to the target location. In Experiments 1A (single feature search) and 1B (conjunction feature search), we found that the attentional disengagement was significantly delayed or accelerated when center stimuli shared color features with the target or salient distractor, but not in shape feature. Moreover, we found that the difference between the two feature dimensions might be caused by their different search difficulty (Experiment 1C). Therefore, in Experiment 2, we matched the difficulty of searching for color and shape tasks before exploring whether there were differences in the effects of different feature dimensions on attentional disengagement. However, the results in Experiment 2 were similar to those in Experiment 1A, indicating that the different effects of feature dimensions on attentional disengagement were caused by feature asymmetry. Therefore, in Experiment 3, we improved the salient discernibility of shape dimension and matched color search to it. The results showed that although the attentional disengagement was delayed in shape dimension, it was still smaller than that in color dimension. Our results supported that goal-oriented attention sets were the main cause of delayed attentional disengagement. By series of experiments, we found that the utilization of different feature dimensions was associated with task difficulty and the features asymmetry in both single and conjunction visual search.

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.

Oculomotor suppression of abrupt onsets versus color singletons

There is considerable evidence that salient items can be suppressed in order to prevent attentional capture. However, this evidence has relied almost exclusively on paradigms using color singletons as salient distractors. It is therefore unclear whether other kinds of salient stimuli, such as abrupt onsets, can also be suppressed. Using an additional singleton paradigm optimized for detecting oculomotor suppression, we directly compared color singletons with abrupt onsets. Participants searched for a target shape (e.g., green diamond) and attempted to ignore salient distractors that were either abrupt onsets or color singletons. First eye movements were used to assess whether salient distractors captured attention or were instead suppressed. Initial experiments using a type of abrupt onset from classic attentional capture studies (four white dots) revealed that abrupt onsets strongly captured attention whereas color singletons were suppressed. After controlling for important differences between the onsets and color singletons - such as luminance and color - abrupt-onset capture was reduced but not eliminated. We ultimately conclude that abrupt onsets are not suppressed like color singletons.

Covert attention is attracted to prior target locations: Evidence from the probe paradigm

There is growing evidence that visual attention can be guided by selection history. One example of this is intertrial location priming, whereby attention is attracted to the target location from the previous trial. Most previous demonstrations of location priming have relied on manual response time effects whereby search is speeded when the target location repeats from the previous trial. However, these latency-based effects have recently been challenged as being due to response facilitation that occurs after the target has been found, rather than an attentional bias toward the previous target location. To resolve this, the current study used a probe paradigm to assess whether covert attention is biased to the previous-trial target location. On search trials, participants searched for a specific target shape amongst distractor shapes and made a speeded response to the location of a dot inside the target. On probe trials, letters briefly appeared at each search location and after a delay, participants were asked to report as many letters as possible. Probe report accuracy was used to assess the likelihood that a given location was attended. Three experiments indicated that probe report accuracy was greatly improved for letters at the previous-trial target location compared with baseline levels. Importantly, this occurred even when strong attentional guidance to the target was encouraged and even when a nontarget stimulus appeared at the primed location. Altogether, the results suggest that covert attention is strongly attracted to the previous target location during visual search.

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.

Inhibition continues to guide search under concurrent visual working memory load

It is well known that attention can be automatically attracted to salient items. However, recent studies show that it is possible to avoid distraction by a salient item (with a known feature), leading to facilitated search. This article tests a proposed mechanism for distractor inhibition: that a mental representation of the distractor feature held in visual working memory (VWM) allows attention to be guided away from the distractor. We tested this explanation by examining color-based inhibition in visual search for a shape target with and without VWM load. In Experiment 1 the presence of a distractor facilitated visual search under low and high VWM loads, as reflected in faster response times when the distractor was present (compared to absent), and in fewer eye movements to the salient distractor than the non-target items. However, the eye movement inhibition effect was noticeably weakened in the load conditions. Experiment 2 explored further, to distinguish between inhibition of the distractor color and activation of the (irrelevant) target color. Intermittently presenting single-color search trials that contained only either a target, distractor or a neutral-colored singleton revealed that the distractor color attracted attention less than the neutral color with and without VWM load. The target color, however, only attracted attention more than neutral colors under no load, whereas a VWM load completely eliminated this effect. This suggests that although VWM plays a role in guiding attention to the (irrelevant) target color, distractor-feature inhibition can operate independently.

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.

Does feature intertrial priming guide attention? The jury is still out

Our search performance is strongly influenced by our past experience. In the lab, this influence has been demonstrated by investigating a variety of phenomena, including intertrial priming, statistical learning, and reward history, and collectively referred to as selection history. The resulting findings have led researchers to claim that selection history guides attention, thereby challenging the prevailing dichotomy, according to which top-down and bottom-up factors alone determine attentional priority. Here, we re-examine this claim with regard to one selection-history phenomenon, feature intertrial priming (aka priming of pop-out). We evaluate the evidence that specifically pertains to the role of feature intertrial priming in attentional guidance, rather than in later selective processes occurring after the target is found. We distinguish between the main experimental rationales, while considering the extent to which feature intertrial priming, as studied through different protocols, shares characteristics of top-down attention. We show that there is strong evidence that feature intertrial priming guides attention when the experimental protocol departs from the canonical paradigm and encourages observers to maintain the critical feature in visual working memory or to form expectations about the upcoming target. By contrast, the current evidence regarding the standard feature intertrial priming phenomenon is inconclusive. We propose directions for future research and suggest that applying the methodology used here in order to re-evaluate of the role of other selection history phenomena in attentional guidance should clarify the mechanisms underlying the strong impact of past experience on visual search performance.

The development of oculomotor suppression of salient distractors in children

There is considerable evidence that adults can prevent attentional capture by physically salient stimuli via proactive inhibition. A key question is whether young children can also inhibit salient stimuli to prevent visual distraction. The current study directly compared attentional capture in children (M_age = 5.5 years) and adults (M_age = 19.3 years) by measuring overt eye movements. Participants searched for a target shape among heterogeneous distractor shapes and attempted to ignore a salient color singleton distractor. The destination of first saccades was used to assess attentional capture by the salient distractor, providing a more direct index of attentional allocation than prior developmental studies. Adults were able to suppress saccades to the singleton distractor, replicating previous studies. Children, however, demonstrated no such oculomotor suppression; first saccades were equally likely to be directed to the singleton distractor and nonsingleton distractors. Subsequent analyses indicated that children were able to suppress the distractor, but this occurred approximately 550 ms after stimulus presentation. The current results suggest that children possess some level of top-down control over visual attention, but this top-down control is delayed compared with adults. Development of this ability may be related to executive functions, which include goal-directed behavior such as organized search and impulse control as well as preparatory and inhibitory cognitive functions.

Oculomotor inhibition and location priming in schizophrenia

Schizophrenia is widely thought to involve elevated distractibility, which may reflect a general impairment in top-down inhibitory processes. Schizophrenia also appears to involve increased priming of previously performed actions. Here, we used a highly refined eye-tracking paradigm that makes it possible to concurrently assess distractibility, inhibition, and priming. In both healthy control subjects (HCS, N = 41) and people with schizophrenia (PSZ, N = 46), we found that initial saccades were actually less likely to be directed toward a salient "singleton" distractor than toward less salient distractors, reflecting top-down suppression of the singleton. Remarkably, this oculomotor suppression effect was as strong or stronger in PSZ than in HCS, indicating intact inhibitory control. In addition, saccades were frequently directed to the location of the previous-trial target in both groups, but this priming effect was much stronger in PSZ than in HCS. Indeed, PSZ directed gaze toward the location of the previous-trial target as often as they directed gaze to the location of the current-trial target. These results demonstrate that-at least in the context of visual search-PSZ are no more distractable than HCS and are fully capable of inhibiting salient-but-irrelevant stimuli. However, PSZ do exhibit exaggerated priming, focusing on recently attended locations even when this is not beneficial for goal attainment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Statistical learning of target selection and distractor suppression shape attentional priority according to different timeframes

Recent findings suggest that attentional and oculomotor control is heavily affected by past experience, giving rise to selection and suppression history effects, so that target selection is facilitated if they appear at frequently attended locations, and distractor filtering is facilitated at frequently ignored locations. While selection history effects once instantiated seem to be long-lasting, whether suppression history is similarly durable is still debated. We assessed the permanence of these effects in a unique experimental setting investigating eye-movements, where the locations associated with statistical unbalances were exclusively linked with either target selection or distractor suppression. Experiment 1 and 2 explored the survival of suppression history in the long and in the short term, respectively, revealing that its lingering traces are relatively short lived. Experiment 3 showed that in the very same experimental context, selection history effects were long lasting. These results seem to suggest that different mechanisms support the learning-induced plasticity triggered by selection and suppression history. Specifically, while selection history may depend on lasting changes within stored representations of the visual space, suppression history effects hinge instead on a functional plasticity which is transient in nature, and involves spatial representations which are constantly updated and adaptively sustain ongoing oculomotor control.

Eye movements are not mandatorily preceded by the N2pc component

Researchers typically distinguish between two mechanisms of attentional selection in vision: overt and covert attention. A commonplace assumption is that overt eye movements are automatically preceded by shifts of covert attention during visual search. Although the N2pc component is a putative index of covert attentional orienting, little is currently known about its relationship with overt eye movements. This is because most previous studies of the N2pc component prohibit overt eye movements. The current study assessed this relationship by concurrently measuring covert attention (via the N2pc) and overt eye movements (via eye tracking). Participants searched displays for a lateralized target stimulus and were allowed to generate overt eye movements during the search. We then assessed whether overt eye movements were preceded by the N2pc component. The results indicated that saccades were preceded by an N2pc component, but only when participants were required to carefully inspect the target stimulus before initiating the eye movement. When participants were allowed to make naturalistic eye movements in service of visual search, there was no evidence of an N2pc component before eye movements. These findings suggest that the N2pc component does not always precede overt eye movements during visual search. Implications for understanding the relationship between covert and overt attention are discussed.

Proactive distractor suppression elicited by statistical regularities in visual search

Irrelevant salient objects may capture our attention and interfere with visual search. Recently, it was shown that distraction by a salient object is reduced when it is presented more frequently at one location than at other locations. The present study investigates whether this reduced distractor interference is the result of proactive spatial suppression, implemented prior to display onset, or reactive suppression, occurring after attention has been directed to that location. Participants were asked to search for a shape singleton in the presence of an irrelevant salient color singleton which was presented more often at one location (the high-probability location) than at all other locations (the low-probability locations). On some trials, instead of the search task, participants performed a probe task, in which they had to detect the offset of a probe dot. The results of the search task replicated previous findings showing reduced distractor interference in trials in which the salient distractor was presented at the high-probability location as compared with the low-probability locations. The probe task showed that reaction times were longer for probes presented at the high-probability location than at the low-probability locations. These results indicate that through statistical learning the location that is likely to contain a distractor is suppressed proactively (i.e., prior to display onset). It suggests that statistical learning modulates the first feed-forward sweep of information processing by deprioritizing locations that are likely to contain a distractor in the spatial priority map.

Probing early attention following negative and positive templates

In visual search tasks, cues indicating the upcoming distractor color can benefit search performance compared with uninformative cues. However, benefits from these negative cues are consistently smaller than benefits from positive cues (cuing target color), even when both cues are equally informative. This suggests that using a negative template is less effective than using a positive template. Here, we contrast the early attentional effects of negative and positive templates using the letter probe technique. On most trials, participants searched for a shape-defined target after receiving a positive, negative, or neutral color cue. On occasional probe trials, letters briefly appeared on the search items, and participants reported as many letters as possible. Examining the proportion of letters reported on potential targets versus distractors provided a snapshot of attentional allocation at the time of the probe. Across probes at 100, 250, and 400 ms, participants recalled more letters on target-colored objects than letters on distractor-colored objects following both negative and positive cues. These cuing benefits on probe report trials were larger at later probe times than early probe times, indicating both types of cues became more effective across time. Importantly, negative cue probe benefits were consistently smaller than positive cue benefits. Finally, following an extremely short probe (25 ms), we found no RT benefit following negative cues as well as no evidence that negatively cued items capture attention. These results help explain the previously reported differences in RT benefit following positive and negative cues, and support the idea of early active attentional suppression.

Progress Toward Resolving the Attentional Capture Debate

For over 25 years, researchers have debated whether physically salient stimuli capture attention in an automatic manner, independent of the observer's goals, or whether the capture of attention depends on the match between a stimulus and the observer's task set. Recent evidence suggests an intermediate position in which salient stimuli automatically produce a priority signal, but the capture of attention can be prevented via an inhibitory mechanism that suppresses the salient stimulus. Here, proponents from multiple sides of the debate describe how their original views have changed in light of recent research, as well as remaining areas of disagreement. These perspectives highlight some emerging areas of consensus and provide new directions for future research on attentional capture.

Can salient stimuli really be suppressed?

Although it is often assumed that a physically salient stimulus automatically captures attention even when it is irrelevant to a current task, the signal-suppression hypothesis proposes that observers can actively suppress a salient-but-irrelevant distractor. However, it is still unknown whether suppression alone (i.e., without target enhancement) is potent enough to override attentional capture by a salient singleton in an otherwise-homogeneous background. The current study addressed this issue. On search trials (70% of trials), participants searched for a shape target on trials that either did or did not contain an irrelevant color singleton. The effects of learning to suppress the color of the singleton were examined on interleaved probe trials (30% of trials). On these trials, participants searched for a probe target letter; those letters were presented on four ovals (one colored oval and three gray ovals). Each colored oval was a singleton that was one of three types: the color of the distractor on search trials, the color of the target on search trials, or a neutral color that had not appeared on search trials. Responses were faster for the probe target on a neutral-colored or target-colored item than on a gray-colored item; however, responses were slower for the probe target on a distractor-colored item than on a gray-colored item. The results demonstrate a powerful suppression mechanism overriding attentional capture by a singleton item.

Changes in visual cortical processing attenuate singleton distraction during visual search

The ability to suppress distractions is essential to successful completion of goal-directed behaviors. Several behavioral studies have recently provided strong evidence that learned suppression may be particularly efficient in reducing distractor interference. Expectations about a distractor's repeated location, color, or even presence are rapidly learned and used to attenuate interference. In this study, we use a visual search paradigm in which a color singleton, which is known to capture attention, occurs within blocks with high or low frequency. The behavioral results show reduced singleton interference during the high compared to the low frequency block (Won et al., 2019). The fMRI results provide evidence that the attenuation of distractor interference is supported by changes in singleton, target, and non-salient distractor representations within retinotopic visual cortex. These changes in visual cortex are accompanied by findings that singleton-present trials compared to non-singleton trials produce greater activation in bilateral parietal cortex, indicative of attentional capture, in low frequency, but not high frequency blocks. Together, these results suggest that the readout of saliency signals associated with an expected color singleton from visual cortex is suppressed, resulting in less competition for attentional priority in frontoparietal attentional control regions.

Attentional dwelling and capture by color singletons

Can salient stimuli-such as color singletons and abrupt onsets-involuntarily capture spatial attention? We previously reported evidence that abrupt onsets can capture attention, but the effects of this capture can become latent under easy visual search. The present experiments examined whether a similar pattern of latent capture occurs for task-irrelevant color singletons. Participants searched for a perfect circle among oval distractors. We manipulated search difficulty by varying the width of the oval distractors, making them more or less target-like (i.e., more or less circular). With search displays of homogeneous distractors, cue validity effects increased linearly with search difficulty, indicating capture by color singletons (Experiments 1 and 2). With heterogeneous distractors, however, discouraging the use of singleton-detection mode to find the target circle, cue validity effects from color singletons were negligible at all difficulty levels (Experiment 3). Using these exact same heterogeneous search displays, meanwhile, abrupt onsets produced very large cue validity effects (Experiment 4). We conclude that whereas abrupt onsets can capture attention based purely on salience, static color singletons capture attention only when made task-relevant by promoting singleton-detection mode (i.e., contingent capture). The data further support an attentional dwelling account of capture costs and reinforce the recommendation that, to ensure sensitivity to detect the presence (or absence) of attention capture, capture experiments should employ a difficult visual search.

Assessing introspective awareness of attention capture

Visual attention can sometimes be involuntarily captured by salient stimuli, and this may lead to impaired performance in a variety of real-world tasks. If observers were aware that their attention was being captured, they might be able to exert control and avoid subsequent distraction. However, it is unknown whether observers can detect attention capture when it occurs. In the current study, participants searched for a target shape and attempted to ignore a salient color distractor. On a subset of trials, participants then immediately classified whether the salient distractor captured their attention ("capture" vs. "no capture"). Participants were slower and less accurate at detecting the target on trials on which they reported "capture" than "no capture." Follow-up experiments revealed that participants specifically detected covert shifts of attention to the salient item. Altogether, these results indicate that observers can have immediate awareness of visual distraction, at least under certain circumstances.

Introducing a Bayesian model of selective attention based on active inference

Information gathering comprises actions whose (sensory) consequences resolve uncertainty (i.e., are salient). In other words, actions that solicit salient information cause the greatest shift in beliefs (i.e., information gain) about the causes of our sensations. However, not all information is relevant to the task at hand: this is especially the case in complex, naturalistic scenes. This paper introduces a formal model of selective attention based on active inference and contextual epistemic foraging. We consider a visual search task with a special emphasis on goal-directed and task-relevant exploration. In this scheme, attention modulates the expected fidelity (precision) of the mapping between observations and hidden states in a state-dependent or context-sensitive manner. This ensures task-irrelevant observations have little expected information gain, and so the agent - driven to reduce expected surprise (i.e., uncertainty) - does not actively seek them out. Instead, it selectively samples task-relevant observations, which inform (task-relevant) hidden states. We further show, through simulations, that the atypical exploratory behaviours in conditions such as autism and anxiety may be due to a failure to appropriately modulate sensory precision in a context-specific way.

Oscillatory Mechanisms of Preparing for Visual Distraction

Evidence shows that observers preactivate a target representation in preparation of a visual selection task. In this study, we addressed the question if and how preparing to ignore an anticipated distractor differs from preparing for an anticipated target. We measured EEG while participants memorized a laterally presented color, which was cued to be either a target or a distractor in two subsequent visual search tasks. Decoding the location of items in the search display from EOG channels revealed that, initially, the anticipated distractor attracted attention and could only be ignored later during the trial. This suggests that distractors could not be suppressed in advance but were represented in an active, attention-guiding format. Consistent with this, lateralized posterior alpha power did not dissociate between target and distractor templates during the delay periods, suggesting similar encoding and maintenance. However, distractor preparation did lead to relatively enhanced nonlateralized posterior alpha power, which appeared to gate sensory processing at search display onset to prevent attentional capture in general. Finally, anticipating distractors also led to enhanced midfrontal theta power during the delay period, a signal that was predictive of how strongly both target and distractor were represented in the search display. Together, our results speak against a distractor-specific advance inhibitory template, thus contrary to the preactivation of specific target templates. Rather, we demonstrate a general selection suppression mechanism, which serves to prevent initial involuntary capture by anticipated distracting input.