Parallel distractor rejection as a binding mechanism in search

Effects of spatial location on distractor interference

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

On the role of top-down and bottom-up guidance in conjunction search: Singleton interference revisited

The current study reassessed the potential of salient singleton distractors to interfere in conjunction search. Experiment 1 investigated conjunctions of colour and orientation, using densely packed arrays that produced highly efficient search. The results demonstrated clear interference effects of singleton distractors in task-relevant dimensions colour and orientation, but no interference from those in a task-irrelevant dimension (motion). Goals exerted an influence in constraining this interference such that the singleton interference along one dimension was modulated by target relevance along the other task relevant dimension. Colour singleton interference was much stronger when the singleton shared the target orientation, and orientation interference was much stronger when the orientation singleton shared the target colour. Experiments 2 and 3 examined singleton-distractor interference in feature search. The results showed strong interference particularly from task-relevant dimensions but a reduced role for top-down, feature-based modulation of singleton interference, compared with conjunction search. The results are consistent with a model of conjunction search based on core elements of the guided search and dimension weighting approaches, whereby weighted dimensional feature contrast signals are combined with top-down feature guidance signals in a feature-independent map that serves to guide search.

Does attentional suppression occur at the level of perception or decision-making? Evidence from Gaspelin et al.'s (2015) probe letter task

Visual attention is often inadvertently captured by salient stimuli. It was suggested that it is possible to prevent attentional capture in some search tasks by suppressing salient stimuli below baseline. Evidence for attentional suppression comes from a probe task that was interleaved with the main search task. In the probe task of Gaspelin et al. (Psychol Sci 26(11):1740-1750, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615597913 ), letters were shown on the stimuli of the search display and participants had to identify as many letters as possible. Performance was found to be worse for letters shown on the distractor compared to non-salient non-target stimuli, suggesting that distractor processing was suppressed below baseline. However, it is unclear whether suppression occurred at the level of perception or decision-making because participants may have reported letters on the distractor less frequently than letters on nontargets. This decision-level bias may have degraded performance for letters on distractor compared to nontarget stimuli without changing perception. After replicating the original findings, we conducted two experiments where we avoided report bias by cueing only a single letter for report. We found that the difference between distractor and nontarget stimuli was strongly reduced, suggesting that decision-level processes contribute to attentional suppression. In contrast, the difference between target and non-target stimuli was unchanged, suggesting that it reflected perceptual-level enhancement of the target stimuli.

Evidence for top-down suppression of negative features in the target feature dimension

While searching for a goal-relevant object, an internal representation of the features necessary to identify the to-be-searched-for object (i.e., target) guides attention towards visual stimuli with matching properties. Recent evidence suggests that features that negatively define a target (i.e., negative features) also bias attentional allocation through top-down suppression. Since humans usually know what to look for, it will rarely, if ever, be the case that a negative feature defines a goal-relevant object alone. Thus, to better understand the relevance of top-down suppression, our participants searched for a target conjunctively defined by a positive (e.g., a blue bar) and a negative feature (e.g., a nonred bar) with both features realized within the same dimension (color in Experiments 1, 3 and 4, orientation in Experiment 2). Experiments 1 and 2 showed that reaction times were slower if cues with a negative feature preceded the target at the same versus a different position (i.e., validly vs. invalidly cued targets), indicating suppression. In contrast, cues with a task-irrelevant different-dimension feature elicited no significant reaction time difference between validly cued and invalidly cued trials. In addition, Experiment 3 showed that while negative cues were top-down suppressed, cues with a positive feature captured attention. This finding indicated that both positive and negative features guide visual attention through capture and suppression, respectively, during the search for a target defined by the presence of one and the absence of another feature from the same dimension. However, suppression seems to apply to the negative and all nontarget features in the task-relevant dimension. This was shown in Experiment 4, in which participants suppressed cues with a task-irrelevant color similarly to cues with a negative color.

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.

Visual search asymmetry depends on target-distractor feature similarity: Is the asymmetry simply a result of distractor rejection speed?

Previous studies have shown that in visual search, varying the target and distractor familiarity produces a search asymmetry: Detecting a novel target among familiar distractors is more efficient than detecting a familiar target among novel distractors. One explanation is that novel targets have enhanced salience and are detected preattentively. Conversely, familiar distractors may be easier to reject. The current study postulates that target-distractor feature similarity, in addition to target or distractor familiarity, is a key determinant of visual search efficiency. The results of two experiments reveal that visual search is more efficient when distractors are familiar regardless of target familiarity, but only when the target-distractor similarity is high. When similarity is low, the visual search asymmetry disappears and the search times become highly efficient, with search slopes not different from zero regardless of target or distractor familiarity. However, although distractor familiarity plays an important role in inducing the search asymmetry, comparisons of search efficiency in target-present and target-absent trials reveal that search asymmetries cannot be explained solely by the faster speed of rejecting familiar distractors, as proposed by previous studies. Rather, distractor familiarity influences processes outside of stimulus selection, such as search monitoring and termination decisions. Competition among bottom-up item salience effects and top-down shape recognition processes is proposed to account for these findings.

Template-to-distractor distinctiveness regulates visual search efficiency

All models of attention include the concept of an attentional template (or a target or search template). The template is conceptualized as target information held in memory that is used for prioritizing sensory processing and determining if an object matches the target. It is frequently assumed that the template contains a veridical copy of the target. However, we review recent evidence showing that the template encodes a version of the target that is adapted to the current context (e.g. distractors, task, etc.); information held within the template may include only a subset of target features, real world knowledge, pre-existing perceptual biases, or even be a distorted version of the veridical target. We argue that the template contents are customized in order to maximize the ability to prioritize information that distinguishes targets from distractors. We refer to this as template-to-distractor distinctiveness and hypothesize that it contributes to visual search efficiency by exaggerating target-to-distractor dissimilarity.

Perspectivas teóricas y evidencia empírica sobre la estructura de la inhibición

<p>Desde el punto de vista teórico la inhibición ha sido un mecanismo relevante para explicar cómo las personas seleccionan información relevante y descartan información irrelevante. A su vez, parece estar fuertemente implicada en el dominio y adquisición de competencias sociales, emocionales y comportamentales. De manera inversa,  los fallos en esta habilidad se asocian a diferentes síndromes y a la emergencia de comportamientos no deseados, como por ejemplo el abuso de sustancias, los problemas atencionales, el sobrepeso, entre otros.  Aunque, actualmente existe acuerdo sobre la importancia de la inhibición, existen divergencias en cuanto a su definición conceptual y operativa. Principalmente, existe un fuerte debate en torno a si la inhibición es un constructo unitario o debería fragmentarse en un conjunto de procesos. El objetivo de este  trabajo, es por tanto, describir los hallazgos y posturas más relevantes en relación a las problemáticas en el abordaje del constructo inhibitorio. Para ello, en primer lugar se expondrá una propuesta explicativa del control de la interferencia basada en un enfoque no inhibitorio. En segundo lugar, se describirán los modelos más representativos, de uno, dos y tres factores para finalmente, exponer algunos de los aportes y hallazgos propuestos como principal fuente de evidencia a favor del enfoque fragmentado.</p>

Entrainment of Human Alpha Oscillations Selectively Enhances Visual Conjunction Search

The functional role of the alpha-rhythm which dominates the human electroencephalogram (EEG) is unclear. It has been related to visual processing, attentional selection and object coherence, respectively. Here we tested the interaction of alpha oscillations of the human brain with visual search tasks that differed in their attentional demands (pre-attentive vs. attentive) and also in the necessity to establish object coherence (conjunction vs. single feature). Between pre- and post-assessment elderly subjects received 20 min/d of repetitive transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) over the occipital cortex adjusted to their individual alpha frequency over five consecutive days. Compared to sham the entrained alpha oscillations led to a selective, set size independent improvement in the conjunction search task performance but not in the easy or in the hard feature search task. These findings suggest that cortical alpha oscillations play a specific role in establishing object coherence through suppression of distracting objects.

A Neural Decomposition of Visual Search Using Voxel-based Morphometry

The ability to search efficiently for visual targets among distractors can break down after a variety of brain lesions, but the specific processes affected by the lesions are unclear. We examined search over space (conjunction search) and over time plus space (preview search) in a consecutive series of patients with acquired brain lesions. We also assessed performance on standard neuropsychological measures of visuospatial short-term memory (Corsi Block), sustained attention and memory updating (the contrast between forward and backward digit span), and visual neglect. Voxel-based morphometry analyses revealed regions in the occipital (middle occipital gyrus), posterior parietal (angular gyrus), and temporal cortices (superior and middle temporal gyri extending to the insula), along with underlying white matter pathways, associated with poor search. Going beyond standard voxel-based morphometry analyses, we then report correlation measures of structural damage in these regions and the independent neuropsychological measures of other cognitive functions. We find distinct patterns of correlation in areas linked to poor search, suggesting that the areas play functionally different roles in search. We conclude that neuropsychological disorders of search can be linked to necessary and distinct cognitive functions, according to the site of lesion.

Surface-based constraints on target selection and distractor rejection: evidence from preview search

In preview search when an observer ignores an early appearing set of distractors, there can subsequently be impeded detection of new targets that share the colour of this preview. This "negative carry-over effect" has been attributed to an active inhibitory process targeted against the old items and inadvertently their features. Here we extend negative carry-over effects to the case of stereoscopically defined surfaces of coplanar elements without common features. In Experiment 1 observers previewed distractors in one surface (1000ms), before being presented with the target and new distractors divided over the old and a new surface either above or below the old one. Participants were slower and less efficient to detect targets in the old surface. In Experiment 2 in both the first and second display the items were divided over two planes in the proportion 66/33% such that no new planes appeared following the preview, and there was no majority of items in any one plane in the final combined display. The results showed that participants were slower to detect the target when it occurred in the old majority surface. Experiment 3 held constant the 2D properties of the stimuli while varying the presence of binocular depth cues. The carry-over effect only occurred in the presence of binocular depth cues, ruling out any account of the results in terms of 2-D cues. The results suggest well formed surfaces in addition to simple features may be targets for inhibition in search.

Extrafoveal preview benefit during free-viewing visual search in the monkey

Previous studies have shown that subjects require less time to process a stimulus at the fovea after a saccade if they have viewed the same stimulus in the periphery immediately prior to the saccade. This extrafoveal preview benefit indicates that information about the visual form of an extrafoveally viewed stimulus can be transferred across a saccade. Here, we extend these findings by demonstrating and characterizing a similar extrafoveal preview benefit in monkeys during a free-viewing visual search task. We trained two monkeys to report the orientation of a target among distractors by releasing one of two bars with their hand; monkeys were free to move their eyes during the task. Both monkeys took less time to indicate the orientation of the target after foveating it, when the target lay closer to the fovea during the previous fixation. An extrafoveal preview benefit emerged even if there was more than one intervening saccade between the preview and the target fixation, indicating that information about target identity could be transferred across more than one saccade and could be obtained even if the search target was not the goal of the next saccade. An extrafoveal preview benefit was also found for distractor stimuli. These results aid future physiological investigations of the extrafoveal preview benefit.