Orchestrating Proactive and Reactive Mechanisms for Filtering Distracting Information: Brain-Behavior Relationships Revealed by a Mixed-Design fMRI Study

Eye movements reveal age differences in how arousal modulates saliency priority but not attention processing speed

The arousal-biased competition theory posits that inducing arousal increases attentional priority of salient stimuli while reducing priority of non-pertinent stimuli. However, unlike in young adults, older adults rarely exhibit shifts in priority under increased arousal, and prior studies have proposed different neural mechanisms to explain how arousal differentially modulates selective attention in older adults. Therefore, we investigated how the threat of unpredictable shock differentially modulates attentional control mechanisms in young and older adults by observing eye movements. Participants completed two oculomotor search tasks in which the salient distractor was typically captured by attention (singleton search) or proactively suppressed (feature search). We found that arousal did not modulate attentional priority for any stimulus among older adults nor affect the speed of attention processing in either age group. Furthermore, we observed that arousal modulated pupil sizes and found a correlation between evoked pupil responses and oculomotor function. Our findings suggest age differences in how the locus coeruleus-noradrenaline system interacts with neural networks of attention and oculomotor function.

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.

Concurrent expectation and experience-based metacontrol: EEG insights and the role of working memory capacity

We investigated the simultaneous influence of expectation and experience on metacontrol, which we define as the instantiation of context-specific control states. These states could entail heightened control states in preparation for frequent task switching or lowered control states for task repetition. Specifically, we examined whether "expectations" regarding future control demands prompt proactive metacontrol, while "experiences" with items associated with specific control demands facilitate reactive metacontrol. In Experiment 1, we utilized EEG with a high temporal resolution to differentiate between brain activities associated with proactive and reactive metacontrol. We successfully observed cue-locked and image-locked ERP patterns associated with proactive and reactive metacontrol, respectively, supporting concurrent instantiation of two metacontrol modes. In Experiment 2, we focused on individual differences to investigate the modulatory role of working memory capacity (WMC) in the concurrent instantiation of two metacontrol modes. Our findings revealed that individuals with higher WMC exhibited enhanced proactive metacontrol, indicated by smaller response time variability (RTV). Additionally, individuals with higher WMC showed a lower tendency to rely on reactive metacontrol, indicated by a smaller item-specific switch probability (ISSP) effect. In conclusion, our results suggest that proactive and reactive metacontrol can coexist, but their interplay is influenced by individuals' WMC. Higher WMC promotes the use of proactive metacontrol while attenuating reliance on reactive metacontrol. This study provides insights into the interplay between proactive and reactive metacontrol and highlights the impact of WMC on their concurrent instantiation.

Statistical learning of target and distractor spatial probability shape a common attentional priority computation

Converging evidence recently put forward the notion that dedicated neurocognitive mechanisms do exist for the suppression of salient, but irrelevant distractors. Along this line, it is plausible to hypothesize that, in appropriate contexts, experience-dependent forms of attentional learning might selectively induce plastic changes within this dedicated circuitry, thus allowing an independent shaping of priorities at the service of attentional filtering. Conversely, previous work suggested that statistical learning (SL) of both target and distractor spatial probability distributions converge in adjusting only the overall attentional priority of locations: in fact, in the presence of an independent manipulation, either related to the target or to the distractor only, SL induces indirect effects (e.g., changes in filtering efficiency due to an uneven distribution of targets), suggesting that SL-induced plastic changes affect a shared neural substrate. Here we tested whether, when (conflicting) target- and distractor-related manipulations are concurrently applied to the very same locations, dedicated mechanisms might support the selective encoding of spatial priority in relation to the specific attentional operation involved. In three related experiments, human healthy participants discriminated the direction of a target arrow, while ignoring a salient distractor, if present; both target and distractor spatial probability distributions were concurrently manipulated in relation to each single location. Critically, the selection bias produced by the target-related SL was marginally reduced by an adverse distractor contingency, and the suppression bias generated by the distractor-related SL was erased, or even reversed, by an adverse target contingency. Our results suggest that even conflicting target- and distractor-related SL manipulations result in the adjustment of a unique spatial priority computation, likely because the process directly relies on direct plastic alterations of shared spatial priority map(s).

The effects of visual distractors on serial dependence

Attractive serial dependence occurs when perceptual decisions are attracted toward previous stimuli. This effect is mediated by spatial attention and is most likely to occur when similar stimuli are attended at nearby locations. Attention, however, also involves the suppression of distracting information and of spatial locations where distracting stimuli have frequently appeared. Although distractors form an integral part of our visual experience, how they affect the processing of subsequent stimuli is unknown. Here, in two experiments, we tested serial dependence from distractor stimuli during an orientation adjustment task. We interleaved adjustment trials with a discrimination task requiring observers to ignore a peripheral distractor randomly appearing on half of the trials. Distractors were either similar to the adjustment probe (Experiment 1) or differed in spatial frequency and contrast (Experiment 2) and were shown at predictable or random locations in separate blocks. The results showed that the distractor caused considerable attentional capture in the discrimination task, with observers likely using proactive strategies to anticipate distractors at predictable locations. However, there was no evidence that the distractors affected the perceptual stream leading to positive serial dependence. Instead, they left a weak repulsive trace in Experiment 1 and more generally interfered with the effect of the previous adjustment probe in the serial dependence task. We suggest that this repulsive bias may reflect the operation of mechanisms involved in attentional suppression.

Singleton effect decreases under time pressure: An fNIRS study

Time pressure affects multiple cognitive processes but how it affects attention capture remains unclear. Two experiments were carried out in the present study to assess whether time pressure prevents attention from capturing by salient distractors and explore the underlying neural mechanisms using functional near-infrared spectroscopy. The results of behavioral tests showed that the singleton effect decreased (Experiment 2) or even disappeared (Experiment 1) when the subject was under time pressure. Neuroimaging data showed that under time pressure, a salient distractor elicited greater activation in the left middle frontal gyrus/inferior frontal gyrus and bilateral superior parietal lobule, brain areas that are thought to be involved in cognitive inhibition and control of spatial attentional shifts. These findings suggest that the reduction or disappearance of the singleton effect under time pressure results from enhanced inhibition of and/or accelerated disengagement from salient distractors.

Learning of irrelevant stimulus-response associations modulates cognitive control

It has been shown that manipulating the proportion of congruent to incongruent trials in conflict tasks (e.g., Stroop, Simon, and flanker tasks) can vary the size of conflict effects, however, by two different mechanisms. One theory is the control learning account (the brain learns the probability of conflict and uses it to proactively adjust the control demand for future trials). The other is the irrelevant stimulus-response learning account (the brain learns the probability of irrelevant stimulus-response associations and uses it to prepare responses). Previous fMRI studies have detected the brain regions that contribute to the control-learning-modulated conflict effects, but it is less known what neural substrates underlie the conflict effects modulated by irrelevant S-R learning. We here investigated this question with a model-based fMRI study, in which the proportion of congruent to incongruent trials changed dynamically in the Simon task and the models learned the probability of irrelevant S-R associations quantitatively. Behavioral analyses showed that the unsigned prediction errors (PEs) of responses generated by the learning models correlated with reaction times irrespective of congruent and incongruent trials, indicating that large unsigned PEs associated with slow responses. The fMRI results showed that the regions of fronto-parietal and cingulo-opercular network involved in cognitive control were significantly modulated by the unsigned PEs, also irrespective of congruent and incongruent trials, indicating that large unsigned PEs associated with transiently increased activity in these regions. These results together suggest that learning of irrelevant S-R associations modulates reactive control, which demonstrates a new way to modulate cognitive control compared to the control learning account.

The role of middle frontal gyrus in working memory retrieval by the effect of target detection tasks: a simultaneous EEG-fMRI study

Maintained working memory (WM) representations have been shown to influence visual target detection selection, while the effect of the visual target detection process on WM retrieval remains largely unknown. In the current research, we used the dual-paradigm of the visual target detection task and the delayed matching task (DMT), which contained the following four conditions: the match condition: the DMT target contained the detection target; the mismatch condition: the DMT target contained the detection distractor; the neutral condition: only the detection target was presented; the catch condition: only the DMT target was presented. Twenty-six subjects were recruited in the experiment with simultaneous EEG-fMRI data. Behaviorally, faster responses were found in the mismatch condition than in the match and neutral conditions. The EEG data found a greater parieto-occipital N1 component in the mismatch condition compared to the neutral condition, and a greater frontal N2 component in the match condition than in the mismatch condition. Moreover, compared to the match and neutral conditions, weaker activations of the bilateral middle frontal gyrus (MFG) were observed in the mismatch condition. And the representational similarity analysis (RSA) revealed significant differences in the representational patterns of the bilateral MFG between mismatch and match conditions, as well as in the representational patterns of the left MFG between mismatch and neutral conditions. Additionally, the left MFG may be the brain source of the N1 component in the mismatch condition. These findings suggest that the mismatch between the DMT target and detection target affects early attention allocation and attentional control in WM retrieval, and the MFG may play an important role in WM retrieval by the effect of the target detection task. In conclusion, our work deepens the understanding of the neural mechanisms by which visual target detection affects WM retrieval.

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.

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.

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.

Decreased preparatory activation and inattention to cues suggest lower activation of proactive cognitive control among high procrastinating students

Procrastination is a voluntary delay in completing an important task while being aware that this behavior may lead to negative outcomes. It has been shown that an increased tendency to procrastinate is associated with deficits in some aspects of cognitive control. However, none of the previous studies investigated these dysfunctions through the lenses of the Dual Mechanisms Framework, which differentiates proactive and reactive modes of control. The present study was designed to fill this gap, using behavioral and neurophysiological assessment during the completion of the AX-Continuous Performance Task (AX-CPT) by high (HP) and low (LP) procrastinating students (N = 139). Behavioral results indicated that HP (vs. LP) were characterized by increased attentional fluctuations (higher reaction time variability) and reduction in some indices of proactive cognitive control (lower d'-context and A-cue bias, but similar PBIs). Furthermore, the neurophysiological data showed that HP, compared with LP, allocated less attentional resources (lower P3b) to cues that help to predict the correct responses to upcoming probes. They also responded with reduced preparatory activity (smaller CNV) after cues presentation. The two groups did not differ in neural responses linked to conflict detection and inhibition (similar N2 and P3a). Obtained findings indicate that HP might present deficits in some cognitive functions that are essential for effective proactive control engagement, along with preserved levels of reactive cognitive control. In the present paper, we discuss the potential neural and cognitive mechanisms responsible for the observed effects.

Reactive and proactive cognitive control as underlying processes of number processing in children

Cognitive control is crucial to resolve conflict in tasks such as the flanker task. Reactive control is used when conflict is rare, whereas proactive control is more efficient in situations where conflict is frequent. Macizo and Herrera (Psychological Research, 2013, Vol. 77, pp. 651-658) found that these two control processes can also underlie two-digit number comparison in adults. Specifically, they observed that the unit-decade compatibility effect decreased in a block containing many conflict trials as compared with a block containing few conflict trials (i.e., a list-wide proportion congruency effect). In the current study, we assessed whether this finding also applies to children (7-, 9-, and 11-year-olds). Participants performed a flanker task and a two-digit number comparison task. In both tasks, the proportion of conflict was manipulated (80% vs. 20%). Results from the flanker task showed a typical list-wide proportion congruency effect in reaction times in all participating age groups. In the number comparison task, we observed list-wide proportion congruency effects in both reaction times and error rates, which did not interact with age. Our findings support the assumption that children as young as 7 years can effectively use proactive and reactive control strategies. We showed that this effect is not limited to standardized artificial laboratory tasks, such as the flanker task, but also underlies more daily life tasks, such as the processing of Arabic numbers.

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.

Dissociation of Proactive and Reactive Cognitive Control in Individuals with Schizotypy: An Event-Related Potential Study

OBJECTIVE

Patients with schizophrenia and individuals with schizotypy, a subclinical group at risk for schizophrenia, have been found to have impairments in cognitive control. The Dual Mechanisms of Cognitive Control (DMC) framework hypothesises that cognitive control can be divided into proactive and reactive control. However, it is unclear whether individuals with schizotypy have differential behavioural impairments and neural correlates underlying these two types of cognitive control.

METHOD

Twenty-five individuals with schizotypy and 26 matched healthy controls (HCs) completed both reactive and proactive control tasks with electroencephalographic data recorded. The proportion of congruent and incongruent trials was manipulated in a classic colour-word Stroop task to induce proactive or reactive control. Proactive control was induced in a context with mostly incongruent (MI) trials and reactive control in a context with mostly congruent (MC) trials. Two event-related potential (ERP) components, medial frontal negativity (MFN, associated with conflict detection) and conflict sustained potential (conflict SP, associated with conflict resolution) were examined.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of behavioural results. In terms of ERP results, in the MC context, HC exhibited significantly larger MFN (360-530 ms) and conflict SP (600-1000 ms) amplitudes than individuals with schizotypy. The two groups did not show any significant difference in MFN or conflict SP in the MI context.

CONCLUSIONS

The present findings provide initial evidence for dissociation of neural activation between proactive and reactive cognitive control in individuals with schizotypy. These findings help us understand cognitive control deficits in the schizophrenia spectrum.

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.

Why Are Children So Distractible? Development of Attention and Motor Control From Childhood to Adulthood

Distractibility is the propensity to behaviorally react to irrelevant information. Although children are more distractible the younger they are, the precise contribution of attentional and motor components to distractibility and their developmental trajectories have not been characterized yet. We used a new behavioral paradigm to identify the developmental dynamics of components contributing to distractibility in a large cohort of French participants balanced, between age groups, in gender and socioeconomic status (N = 352; age: 6-25). Results reveal that each measure of these components, namely voluntary attention, distraction, impulsivity, and motor control, present a distinct maturational timeline. In young children, increased distractibility is mostly the result of reduced sustained attention capacities and enhanced distraction, whereas in teenagers, it is the result of decreased motor control and increased impulsivity.

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.

Modulating the influence of recent trial history on attentional capture via transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of right TPJ

In visual search, salient yet task-irrelevant distractors in the stimulus array interfere with target selection. This is due to the unwanted shift of attention towards the salient stimulus-the so-called attentional capture effect, which delays deployment of attention onto the target. Although powerful and automatic, attentional capture by a salient distractor is nonetheless antagonized by distractor-filtering mechanisms and is further modulated by cross-trial contingencies: The distractor cost is typically more robust when no distraction has been experienced in the immediate past, compared to when a distractor was present on the immediately preceding trial. Here, we used transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to shed light on the causal role of two crucial nodes of the ventral attention network, namely the Temporo-Parietal Junction (TPJ) and the Middle Frontal Gyrus (MFG), in the exogenous control of attention (i.e., attentional capture) and its history-dependent modulation. Participants were asked to discriminate the direction of a target arrow while ignoring a task-irrelevant salient distractor, when present. Immediately after display onset, 10 Hz triple-pulse TMS was delivered either to TPJ or MFG on the right hemisphere. Results demonstrated that stimulation of right TPJ-but not of right MFG, strongly modulated attentional capture as a function of the type of previous trial, by somewhat enhancing the distractor-related cost when the preceding trial was a distractor-absent trial and significantly decreasing the cost when the preceding trial was a distractor-present trial. These findings indicate that TMS of right TPJ exacerbates the effect of the recent history, likely reflecting enhanced updating of the predictive model that dynamically governs proactive distractor-filtering mechanisms. More generally, the results attest to a role of TPJ in mediating the history-dependent modulation of attentional capture.

Multi-dimensional predictions of psychotic symptoms via machine learning

The diagnostic criteria for schizophrenia comprise a diverse range of heterogeneous symptoms. As a result, individuals each present a distinct set of symptoms despite having the same overall diagnosis. Whilst previous machine learning studies have primarily focused on dichotomous patient-control classification, we predict the severity of each individual symptom on a continuum. We applied machine learning regression within a multi-modal fusion framework to fMRI and behavioural data acquired during an auditory oddball task in 80 schizophrenia patients. Brain activity was highly predictive of some, but not all symptoms, namely hallucinations, avolition, anhedonia and attention. Critically, each of these symptoms was associated with specific functional alterations across different brain regions. We also found that modelling symptoms as an ensemble of subscales was more accurate, specific and informative than models which predict compound scores directly. In principle, this approach is transferrable to any psychiatric condition or multi-dimensional diagnosis.

Proactive Control of Emotional Distraction: Evidence From EEG Alpha Suppression

Biased attention towards emotional stimuli is adaptive, as it facilitates responses to important threats and rewards. An unfortunate consequence is that emotional stimuli can become potent distractors when they are irrelevant to current goals. How can this distraction be overcome despite the bias to attend to emotional stimuli? Recent studies show that distraction by irrelevant flankers is reduced when distractor frequency is high, even if they are emotional. A parsimonious explanation is that the expectation of frequent distractors promotes the use of proactive control, whereby attentional control settings can be altered to minimize distraction before it occurs. It is difficult, however, to infer proactive control on the basis of behavioral data alone. We therefore measured neural indices of proactive control while participants performed a target-detection task in which irrelevant peripheral distractors (either emotional or neutral) could appear either frequently (on 75% of trials) or rarely (on 25% of trials). We measured alpha power during the pre-stimulus period to assess proactive control and during the post-stimulus period to determine the consequences of control for subsequent processing. Pre-stimulus alpha power was tonically suppressed in the high, compared to low, distractor frequency condition, regardless of expected distractor valence, indicating sustained use of proactive control. In contrast, post-stimulus alpha suppression was reduced in the high-frequency condition, suggesting that proactive control reduced the need for post-stimulus adjustments. Our findings indicate that a sustained proactive control strategy accounts for the reduction in both emotional and non-emotional distraction when distractors are expected to appear frequently.

Inhibition in selective attention

Our ability to focus on goal-relevant aspects of the environment is critically dependent on our ability to ignore or inhibit distracting information. One perspective is that distractor inhibition is under similar voluntary control as attentional facilitation of target processing. However, a rapidly growing body of research shows that distractor inhibition often relies on prior experience with the distracting information or other mechanisms that need not rely on active representation in working memory. Yet, how and when these different forms of inhibition are neurally implemented remains largely unclear. Here, we review findings from recent behavioral and neuroimaging studies to address this outstanding question. We specifically explore how experience with distracting information may change the processing of that information in the context of current predictive processing views of perception: by modulating a distractor's representation already in anticipation of the distractor, or after integration of top-down and bottom-up sensory signals. We also outline directions for future research necessary to enhance our understanding of how the brain filters out distracting information.

Distractor context manipulation in visual search: How expectations modulate proactive control

Visual search can be guided by top-down and bottom-up processes, with either one dominating the other depending on the task (e.g., feature versus conjunction). Moreover, different search tasks bring about different expectations about the type, or frequency, of distractor stimuli. These expectations could promote top-down "task-sets" that may impact performance even when distractors are temporarily absent. Here, we characterized the role and extent of recruitment of proactive top-down processes for distractor expectation in feature and conjunction search. Participants conducted feature and conjunction search tasks for a visual target among distractors, which were either frequently presented or completely absent. The effects of the recruitment of proactive top-down processes for distractor expectation entailed slower responses, yet more accurate, on distractor-absent trials in the frequent-distractor (versus no-distractor) context of both tasks. These effects were larger in the conjunction versus feature task and were not impacted by stimulus duration and time pressure (short/present in Experiment 1, unlimited/absent in Experiment 2, respectively). Results were replicated when the presence/absence of distractors at each trial was fully predictable (Experiment 3), and when several parameters of visual search were changed (Experiment 4). Our findings indicate that top-down task-sets related to distractor expectation entail performance costs and benefits in visual search. These effects occur throughout task blocks rather than trial-to-trial, are modulated by search type, and confirm that proactive top-down processes intervene in feature search.

Distractor ignoring: strategies, learning, and passive filtering

Our sensory environments contain more information than we can processes and successful behaviors require the ability to separate task-relevant information from task-irrelevant information. While much research on attention has focused on the mechanisms that result in selection of desired information, much less is known about how distracting information is ignored. Here we describe evidence that strategic, learned, and passive information can all contribute to better distractor ignoring. The evidence suggests that there are multiple ways in which distractor ignoring is supported that may be different than those of target selection. Future work will need to identify the mechanisms by which each source of information adjusts attentional priority such that irrelevant information is better ignored.

Probing the Neural Mechanisms for Distractor Filtering and Their History-Contingent Modulation by Means of TMS

In visual search, the presence of a salient, yet task-irrelevant, distractor in the stimulus array interferes with target selection and slows down performance. Neuroimaging data point to a key role of the frontoparietal dorsal attention network in dealing with visual distractors; however, the respective roles of different nodes within the network and their hemispheric specialization are still unresolved. Here, we used transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to evaluate the causal role of two key regions of the dorsal attention network in resisting attentional capture by a salient singleton distractor: the frontal eye field (FEF) and the cortex within the intraparietal sulcus (IPS). The task of the participants (male/female human volunteers) was to discriminate the pointing direction of a target arrow while ignoring a task-irrelevant salient distractor. Immediately after stimulus onset, triple-pulse 10 Hz TMS was delivered either to IPS or FEF on either side of the brain. Results indicated that TMS over the right FEF significantly reduced the behavioral cost engendered by the salient distractor relative to left FEF stimulation. No such effect was obtained with stimulation of IPS on either side of brain. Interestingly, this FEF-dependent reduction in distractor interference interacted with the contingent trial history, being maximal when no distractor was present on the previous trial relative to when there was one. Our results provide direct causal evidence that the right FEF houses key mechanisms for distractor filtering, pointing to a pivotal role of the frontal cortex of the right hemisphere in limiting interference from an irrelevant but attention-grabbing stimulus.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Visually conspicuous stimuli attract our attention automatically and interfere with performance by diverting resources away from the main task. Here, we applied transcranial magnetic stimulation over four frontoparietal cortex locations (frontal eye field and intraparietal sulcus in each hemisphere) to identify regions of the dorsal attention network that help limit interference from task-irrelevant, salient distractors. Results indicate that the right FEF participates in distractor-filtering mechanisms that are recruited when a distracting stimulus is encountered. Moreover, right FEF implements adjustments in distraction-filtering mechanisms following recent encounters with distractors. Together, these findings indicate a different hemispheric contribution of the left versus right dorsal frontal cortex to distraction filtering. This study expands our understanding of how our brains select relevant targets in the face of task-irrelevant, salient distractors.

fMRI study of cannabidiol-induced changes in attention control in treatment-resistant epilepsy

Patients with treatment-resistant epilepsy (TRE) frequently exhibit memory and attention deficits that contribute to their poor personal and societal outcomes. We studied the effects of adjunct treatment with pharmaceutical grade cannabidiol (CBD) oral solution (Epidiolex®; Greenwich Biosciences, Inc.) on attention control processes related to stimulus conflict resolution in patients with TRE. Twenty-two patients with TRE underwent 3 T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) before receiving (PRE) and after achieving a stable dose of CBD (ON). Functional MRI (fMRI) data were collected while patients performed 2 runs of a flanker task (FT). Patients were instructed to indicate via button press the congruent (CON) and incongruent (INC) conditions. We performed t-tests to examine with FT attention control processes at PRE and ON visits and to compare the 2 visits using derived general linear model (GLM) data (INC - CON). We performed generalized psychophysiological interaction (gPPI) analyses to assess changes in condition-based functional connectivity on FT. Median time between fMRI visits was 10 weeks, and median CBD dose at follow-up was 25 mg/kg/d. From PRE to ON, participants experienced improvements in seizure frequency (SF) (p = 0.0009), seizure severity (Chalfont Seizure Severity Scale (CSSS); p < 0.0001), and mood (Total Mood Disturbance (TMD) score from Profile of Mood States (POMS); p = 0.0026). Repeated measures analysis of variance showed nonsignificant improvements in executive function from 34.6 (23.5)% to 41.9 (22.4)% CON accuracy and from 34.2 (25.7)% to 37.6 (24.4)% INC accuracy (p = 0.199). Change in CON accuracy was associated with change in INC accuracy (r_S = 0.81, p = 0.0005). Participants exhibited CBD-induced increases in fMRI activation in the right superior frontal gyrus (SFG) and right insula/middle frontal gyrus (MFG) and decrease in activation for both regions at ON relative to PRE (corrected p = 0.05). The subset of patients who improved in FT accuracy with CBD showed a negative association between change in right insula/MFG activation and change in accuracy for the INC condition (r_S = -0.893, p = 0.0068). The gPPI analysis revealed a CBD-induced decrease in condition-based functional connectivity differences for the right SFG seed region (corrected p = 0.05). Whole-brain regression analysis documented a negative association of change in right insula/MFG condition-based connectivity with change in INC accuracy (corrected p = 0.005). Our results suggest that CBD modulates attention control processing in patients with TRE by reducing right SFG and right insula/MFG activation related to stimulus conflict resolution and by dampening differences in condition-based functional connectivity of the right SFG. Our study is the first to provide insight into how CBD affects the neural substrates involved in attention processing and how modulation of the activity and functional connectivity related to attentional control processes in the right insula/MFG may be working to improve cognitive performance in TRE.

Monitoring and control in multitasking

The idea that conflict detection triggers control adjustments has been considered a basic principle of cognitive control. So far, this "conflict-control loop" has mainly been investigated in the context of response conflicts in single tasks. In this theoretical position paper, we explore whether, and how, this principle might be involved in multitasking performance, as well. We argue that several kinds of conflict-control loops can be identified in multitasking at multiple levels (e.g., the response level and the task level), and we provide a selective review of empirical observations. We present examples of conflict monitoring and control adjustments in dual-task and task-switching paradigms, followed by a section on error monitoring and posterror adjustments in multitasking. We conclude by outlining future research questions regarding monitoring and control in multitasking, including the potential roles of affect and associative learning for conflict-control loops in multitasking.

Context-dependent modulation of cognitive control involves different temporal profiles of fronto-parietal activity

To efficiently deal with quickly changing task demands, we often need to organize our behaviour on different time scales. For example, to ignore irrelevant and select relevant information, cognitive control might be applied in reactive (short time scale) or proactive (long time scale) mode. These two control modes play a pivotal role in cognitive-neuroscientific theorizing but the temporal dissociation of the underlying neural mechanisms is not well established empirically. In this fMRI study, a cognitive control task was administered in contexts with mainly congruent (MC) and mainly incongruent (MI) trials to induce reactive and proactive control, respectively. Based on behavioural profiles, we expected cognitive control in the MC context to be characterized by transient activity (measured on-trial) in task-relevant areas. In the MI context, cognitive control was expected to be reflected in sustained activity (measured in the intertrial interval) in similar or different areas. Results show that in the MC context, on-trial transient activity (incongruent - congruent trials) was increased in fronto-parietal areas, compared to the MI context. These areas included dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) and intraparietal sulcus (IPS). In the MI context, sustained activity in similar fronto-parietal areas during the intertrial interval was increased, compared to the MC context. These results illuminate how context-dependent reactive and proactive control subtend the same brain areas but operate on different time scales.

Transient and Sustained Control Mechanisms Supporting Novel Instructed Behavior

The success of humans in novel environments is partially supported by our ability to implement new task procedures via instructions. This complex skill has been associated with the activity of control-related brain areas. Current models link fronto-parietal and cingulo-opercular networks with transient and sustained modes of cognitive control, based on observations during repetitive task settings or rest. The current study extends this dual model to novel instructed tasks. We employed a mixed design and an instruction-following task to extract phasic and tonic brain signals associated with the encoding and implementation of novel verbal rules. We also performed a representation similarity analysis to capture consistency in task-set encoding within trial epochs. Our findings show that both networks are involved while following novel instructions: transiently, during the implementation of the instruction, and in a sustained fashion, across novel trials blocks. Moreover, the multivariate results showed that task representations in the cingulo-opercular network were more stable than in the fronto-parietal one. Our data extend the dual model of cognitive control to novel demanding situations, highlighting the high flexibility of control-related regions in adopting different temporal profiles.

Context Modulates Congruency Effects in Selective Attention to Social Cues

Head and gaze directions are used during social interactions as essential cues to infer where someone attends. When head and gaze are oriented toward opposite directions, we need to extract socially meaningful information despite stimulus conflict. Recently, a cognitive and neural mechanism for filtering-out conflicting stimuli has been identified while performing non-social attention tasks. This mechanism is engaged proactively when conflict is anticipated in a high proportion of trials and reactively when conflict occurs infrequently. Here, we investigated whether a similar mechanism is at play for limiting distraction from conflicting social cues during gaze or head direction discrimination tasks in contexts with different probabilities of conflict. Results showed that, for the gaze direction task only (Experiment 1), inverse efficiency (IE) scores for distractor-absent trials (i.e., faces with averted gaze and centrally oriented head) were larger (indicating worse performance) when these trials were intermixed with congruent/incongruent distractor-present trials (i.e., faces with averted gaze and tilted head in the same/opposite direction) relative to when the same distractor-absent trials were shown in isolation. Moreover, on distractor-present trials, IE scores for congruent (vs. incongruent) head-gaze pairs in blocks with rare conflict were larger than in blocks with frequent conflict, suggesting that adaptation to conflict was more efficient than adaptation to infrequent events. However, when the task required discrimination of head orientation while ignoring gaze direction, performance was not impacted by both block-level and current trial congruency (Experiment 2), unless the cognitive load of the task was increased by adding a concurrent task (Experiment 3). Overall, our study demonstrates that during attention to social cues proactive cognitive control mechanisms are modulated by the expectation of conflicting stimulus information at both the block- and trial-sequence level, and by the type of task and cognitive load. This helps to clarify the inherent differences in the distracting potential of head and gaze cues during speeded social attention tasks.

Verbal and Nonverbal Anticipatory Mechanisms in Bilinguals

Empirical evidence collected so far has revealed that the bilingual advantage cannot be reduced to a single component of the executive functioning, and point to the need to understand the effects of bilingual experience on cognition as influencing a wider family of mental processes, including, but not limited to, cognitive control. The present study aims to explore a relatively underinvestigated domain of bilingual cognitive processes, namely anticipation, through a series of different paradigms tapping proactive and reactive mechanisms at different levels of cognitive complexity and linguistic components. The sample included 25 adult bilinguals ([Formula: see text] years) and 25 monolinguals ([Formula: see text] years) matched for age, gender, and non-verbal IQ. Participants were administered two experimental tasks: Attentional Network Task (ANT), and auditory picture-word identification task. Compared to monolinguals, bilinguals showed overall faster reaction times and reduced conflict effect on both the ANT and the picture-word identification task. In addition, associations between performances in the nonverbal and the verbal tasks support the role of the nonverbal monitoring component on verbal anticipation. Results are discussed in light of a dynamic interaction between proactive and reactive mechanisms of cognitive control.

Adolescent Gender Differences in Cognitive Control Performance and Functional Connectivity Between Default Mode and Fronto-Parietal Networks Within a Self-Referential Context

Ineffective reduction of functional connectivity between the default mode network (DMN) and frontoparietal network (FPN) during cognitive control can interfere with performance in healthy individuals—a phenomenon present in psychiatric disorders, such as depression. Here, this mechanism is studied in healthy adolescents by examining gender differences in task-regressed functional connectivity using functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and a novel task designed to place the DMN—supporting self-referential processing (SRP)—and FPN—supporting cognitive control—into conflict. Compared to boys, girls showed stronger functional connectivity between DMN and FPN during cognitive control in an SRP context (n = 40; boys = 20), a context that also elicited more errors of omission in girls. The gender difference in errors of omission was mediated by higher self-reported co-rumination—the extensive and repetitive discussion of problems and focus on negative feelings with a same-gender peer—by girls, compared to boys. These findings indicate that placing internal and external attentional demands in conflict lead to persistent functional connectivity between FPN and DMN in girls, but not boys; however, deficits in performance during this context were explained by co-rumination, such that youth with higher co-rumination displayed the largest performance deficits. Previous research shows that co-rumination predicts depressive symptoms during adolescence; thus, gender differences in the mechanisms involved with transitioning from internal to external processing may be relevant for understanding heightened vulnerability for depression in adolescent girls.

It's the Other Way Around! Early Modulation of Sensory Distractor Processing Induced by Late Response Conflict

Understanding the neural processes that maintain goal-directed behavior is a major challenge for the study of attentional control. Although much of the previous work on the issue has focused on prefrontal brain areas, little is known about the contribution of sensory brain processes to the regulation of attentional control. The present EEG study examined brain oscillatory activities invoked in the processing of response conflict in a lateralized Eriksen single-flanker task, in which target letters were presented at fixation and single distractor letters were presented either left or right to the targets. Distractors were response compatible, response incompatible, or neutral in relation to the responses associated with the targets. The behavioral results showed that responses to targets in incompatible trials were slower and more error prone than responses in compatible trials. The electrophysiological results revealed an early sensory lateralization effect in (both evoked and induced) theta power (3-6 Hz) that was more pronounced in incompatible than compatible trials. The sensory lateralization effect preceded in time a midfrontal conflict effect that was indexed by an increase of (induced) theta power (6-9 Hz) in incompatible compared with compatible trials. The findings indicate an early modulation of sensory distractor processing induced by response conflict. Theoretical implications of the findings, in particular with respect to the theory of event coding and theories relating to stimulus-response binding [Henson, R. N., Eckstein, D., Waszak, F., Frings, C., & Horner, A. Stimulus-response bindings in priming. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18, 376-384, 2014; Hommel, B., Müsseler, J., Aschersleben, G., & Prinz, W. The theory of event coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action planning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 849-878, 2001], are discussed.

Strategic inhibition of distractors with visual working memory contents after involuntary attention capture

Previous research has suggested that visual working memory (VWM) contents had a guiding effect on selective attention, and once participants realized that the distractors shared the same information with VWM contents in the search task, they would strategically inhibit the potential distractors with VWM contents. However, previous behavioral studies could not reveal the way how distractors with VWM contents are inhibited strategically. By employing the eye-tracking technique and a dual-task paradigm, we manipulated the probability of memory items occurring as distractors to explore this issue. Consistent with previous behavioral studies, the results showed that the inhibitory effect occurred only in the high-probability condition, while the guiding effect emerged in the low-probability condition. More importantly, the eye-movement results indicated that in the high-probability condition, once few (even one) distractors with VWM contents were captured at first, all the remaining distractors with VWM contents would be rejected as a whole. However, in the low-probability condition, attention could be captured by the majority of distractors with VWM contents. These results suggested that the guiding effect of VWM contents on attention is involuntary in the early stage of visual search. After the completion of this involuntary stage, the guiding effect of task-irrelevant VWM contents on attention could be strategically controlled.

Altering spatial priority maps via statistical learning of target selection and distractor filtering

The cognitive system has the capacity to learn and make use of environmental regularities - known as statistical learning (SL), including for the implicit guidance of attention. For instance, it is known that attentional selection is biased according to the spatial probability of targets; similarly, changes in distractor filtering can be triggered by the unequal spatial distribution of distractors. Open questions remain regarding the cognitive/neuronal mechanisms underlying SL of target selection and distractor filtering. Crucially, it is unclear whether the two processes rely on shared neuronal machinery, with unavoidable cross-talk, or they are fully independent, an issue that we directly addressed here. In a series of visual search experiments, participants had to discriminate a target stimulus, while ignoring a task-irrelevant salient distractor (when present). We systematically manipulated spatial probabilities of either one or the other stimulus, or both. We then measured performance to evaluate the direct effects of the applied contingent probability distribution (e.g., effects on target selection of the spatial imbalance in target occurrence across locations) as well as its indirect or "transfer" effects (e.g., effects of the same spatial imbalance on distractor filtering across locations). By this approach, we confirmed that SL of both target and distractor location implicitly bias attention. Most importantly, we described substantial indirect effects, with the unequal spatial probability of the target affecting filtering efficiency and, vice versa, the unequal spatial probability of the distractor affecting target selection efficiency across locations. The observed cross-talk demonstrates that SL of target selection and distractor filtering are instantiated via (at least partly) shared neuronal machinery, as further corroborated by strong correlations between direct and indirect effects at the level of individual participants. Our findings are compatible with the notion that both kinds of SL adjust the priority of specific locations within attentional priority maps of space.

Foraging Value, Risk Avoidance, and Multiple Control Signals: How the Anterior Cingulate Cortex Controls Value-based Decision-making

Recent work on the role of the ACC in cognition has focused on choice difficulty, action value, risk avoidance, conflict resolution, and the value of exerting control among other factors. A main underlying question is what are the output signals of ACC, and relatedly, what is their effect on downstream cognitive processes? Here we propose a model of how ACC influences cognitive processing in other brain regions that choose actions. The model builds on the earlier Predicted Response Outcome model and suggests that ACC learns to represent specifically the states in which the potential costs or risks of an action are high, on both short and long timescales. It then uses those cost signals as a basis to bias decisions to minimize losses while maximizing gains. The model simulates both proactive and reactive control signals and accounts for a variety of empirical findings regarding value-based decision-making.

Proactive, but Not Reactive, Distractor Filtering Relies on Local Modulation of Alpha Oscillatory Activity

Filter mechanisms that prevent irrelevant information from consuming the limited storage capacity of visual STM are critical for goal-directed behavior. Alpha oscillatory activity has been related to proactive filtering of anticipated distraction. Yet, distraction in everyday life is not always anticipated, necessitating rapid, reactive filtering mechanisms. Currently, the oscillatory mechanisms underlying reactive distractor filtering remain unclear. In the current EEG study, we investigated whether reactive filtering of distractors also relies on alpha-band oscillatory mechanisms and explored possible contributions by oscillations in other frequency bands. To this end, participants performed a lateralized change detection task in which a varying and unpredicted number of distractors were presented both in the relevant hemifield, among targets, and in the irrelevant hemifield. Results showed that, whereas proactive distractor filtering was accompanied by lateralization of alpha-band activity over posterior scalp regions, reactive distractor filtering was not associated with modulations of oscillatory power in any frequency band. Yet, behavioral and post hoc ERP analyses clearly showed that participants selectively encoded relevant information. On the basis of these results, we conclude that reactive distractor filtering may not be realized through local modulation of alpha-band oscillatory activity.

The effects of ongoing distraction on the neural processes underlying signal detection

Distraction can impede our ability to detect and effectively process task-relevant stimuli in our environment. Here we leveraged the high temporal resolution of event-related potentials (ERPs) to study the neural consequences of a global, continuous distractor on signal-detection processes. Healthy, young adults performed the dSAT task, a translational sustained-attention task that has been used across different species and in clinical groups, in the presence and absence of ongoing distracting stimulation. We found the presence of distracting stimuli impaired participants' ability to behaviorally detect task-relevant signal stimuli and greatly affected the neural cascade of processes underlying signal detection. Specifically, we found distraction reduced an anterior and a posterior early-latency N2 ERP component (~140-220ms) and modulated long-latency, detection-related P3 components (P3a: ~200-330ms, P3b: 300-700ms), even to correctly detected targets. These data provide evidence that distraction can induce powerful alterations in the neural processes related to signal detection, even when stimuli are behaviorally detected.

Transient Distraction and Attentional Control during a Sustained Selective Attention Task

Distracting stimuli in the environment can pull our attention away from our goal-directed tasks. fMRI studies have implicated regions in right frontal cortex as being particularly important for processing distractors [e.g., de Fockert, J. W., & Theeuwes, J. Role of frontal cortex in attentional capture by singleton distractors. Brain and Cognition, 80, 367-373, 2012; Demeter, E., Hernandez-Garcia, L., Sarter, M., & Lustig, C. Challenges to attention: A continuous arterial spin labeling (ASL) study of the effects of distraction on sustained attention. Neuroimage, 54, 1518-1529, 2011]. Less is known, however, about the timing and sequence of how right frontal or other brain regions respond selectively to distractors and how distractors impinge upon the cascade of processes related to detecting and processing behaviorally relevant target stimuli. Here we used EEG and ERPs to investigate the neural consequences of a perceptually salient but task-irrelevant distractor on the detection of rare target stimuli embedded in a rapid, serial visual presentation (RSVP) stream. We found that distractors that occur during the presentation of a target interfere behaviorally with detection of those targets, reflected by reduced detection rates, and that these missed targets show a reduced amplitude of the long-latency, detection-related P3 component. We also found that distractors elicited a right-lateralized frontal negativity beginning at 100 msec, whose amplitude negatively correlated across participants with their distraction-related behavioral impairment. Finally, we also quantified the instantaneous amplitude of the steady-state visual evoked potentials elicited by the RSVP stream and found that the occurrence of a distractor resulted in a transient amplitude decrement of the steady-state visual evoked potential, presumably reflecting the pull of attention away from the RSVP stream when distracting stimuli occur in the environment.