The control of stimulus-driven saccades is subject not to central, but to visual attention limitations

Distinct saccade planning and endogenous visuospatial attention maps in parietal cortex: A basis for functional differences in sensory and motor attention

Parietal cortex activity contributes to higher-level cognitive processes, including endogenous visual attention and saccade planning. While visual attention is the process of selecting pertinent information from the environment, saccade planning may involve motor attention in the planning of a specific movement, including the process of selecting the correct path. We isolated areas in parietal cortex involved in saccade planning, while controlling visual attention, to understand the relationship between the two processes. Using our novel stimulus, participants performed a delayed saccade task and an endogenous covert visuospatial attention task with peripheral targets in identical locations. We compared multiple target locations across the two domains at the level of the individual to better understand variability in the relationship between these two maps. The anterior-posterior organization of saccade planning and visual attention maps varied among, but not within, participants, and 14-29% of the maps for each task overlapped one another across hemispheres. Interestingly, within the region of co-activation, over 67% of the voxels responded to the same location for both tasks. These cortical areas of overlap may represent regions of the brain specifically involved in the transfer of information from vision to action along the visuomotor pathway. These results further establish the relationship between maps associated with saccade planning and visual attention at the individual level, indicating the lack of a single saliency map in parietal cortex.

Oculomotor capture by search-irrelevant features in visual working memory: on the crucial role of target-distractor similarity

When searching for varying targets in the environment, a target template has to be maintained in visual working memory (VWM). Recently, we showed that search-irrelevant features of a VWM template bias attention in an object-based manner, so that objects sharing such features with a VWM template capture the eyes involuntarily. Here, we investigated whether target-distractor similarity modulates capture strength. Participants saccaded to a target accompanied by a distractor. A single feature (e.g., shape) defined the target in each trial indicated by a cue, and the cue also varied in one irrelevant feature (e.g., color). The distractor matched the cue's irrelevant feature in half of the trials. Nine experiments showed that target-distractor similarity consistently influenced the degree of oculomotor capture. High target-distractor dissimilarity in the search-relevant feature reduced capture by the irrelevant feature (Experiments 1, 3, 6, 7). However, capture was reduced by high target-distractor similarity in the search-irrelevant feature (Experiments 1, 4, 5, 8). Strong oculomotor capture was observed if target-distractor similarity was reasonably low in the relevant and high in the irrelevant feature, irrespective of whether color or shape were relevant (Experiments 2 and 5). These findings argue for involuntary and object-based, top-down control by VWM templates, whereas its manifestation in oculomotor capture depends crucially on target-distractor similarity in relevant and irrelevant feature dimensions of the search object.

Task-Irrelevant Features in Visual Working Memory Influence Covert Attention: Evidence from a Partial Report Task

Selecting a target based on a representation in visual working memory (VWM) affords biasing covert attention towards objects with memory-matching features. Recently, we showed that even task-irrelevant features of a VWM template bias attention. Specifically, when participants had to saccade to a cued shape, distractors sharing the cue's search-irrelevant color captured the eyes. While a saccade always aims at one target location, multiple locations can be attended covertly. Here, we investigated whether covert attention is captured similarly as the eyes. In our partial report task, each trial started with a shape-defined search cue, followed by a fixation cross. Next, two colored shapes, each including a letter, appeared left and right from fixation, followed by masks. The letter inside that shape matching the preceding cue had to be reported. In Experiment 1, either target, distractor, both, or no object matched the cue's irrelevant color. Target-letter reports were most frequent in target-match trials and least frequent in distractor-match trials. Irrelevant cue and target color never matched in Experiment 2. Still, participants reported the distractor more often to the target's disadvantage, when cue and distractor color matched. Thus, irrelevant features of a VWM template can influence covert attention in an involuntarily object-based manner when searching for trial-wise varying targets.

Attentional competition across saccadic eye movements

Human behavior is guided by visual object recognition. For being recognized, objects compete for limited attentional processing resources. The more objects compete, the lower is performance in recognizing each individual object. Here, we ask whether this competition is confined to eye fixations, periods of relatively stable gaze, or whether it extends from one fixation to the next, across saccadic eye movements. Participants made saccades to a peripheral saccade target. After the saccade, a letter was briefly presented within the saccade target and terminated by a mask. Object recognition of the letter was assessed as participants' report. Critically, either no, two, or four additional non-target objects appeared before the saccade. In Experiment 1, presaccadic non-targets were task-irrelevant and had no effects on postsaccadic object recognition. In Experiment 2, presaccadic non-targets were task-relevant and, here, postsaccadic object recognition deteriorated with increasing number of presaccadic non-targets. As suggested by Experiment 3 and a mathematical model, this effect was due to a slowing down but also a delayed start of visual processing after the saccade. Together, our findings show that objects compete for recognition across saccades, but only if they are task-relevant. This reveals an attentional mechanism of task-driven object recognition that is interlaced with active saccade-mediated vision.

Selective visual processing across competition episodes: a theory of task-driven visual attention and working memory

The goal of this review is to introduce a theory of task-driven visual attention and working memory (TRAM). Based on a specific biased competition model, the ‘theory of visual attention’ (TVA) and its neural interpretation (NTVA), TRAM introduces the following assumption. First, selective visual processing over time is structured in competition episodes. Within an episode, that is, during its first two phases, a limited number of proto-objects are competitively encoded—modulated by the current task—in activation-based visual working memory (VWM). In processing phase 3, relevant VWM objects are transferred via a short-term consolidation into passive VWM. Second, each time attentional priorities change (e.g. after an eye movement), a new competition episode is initiated. Third, if a phase 3 VWM process (e.g. short-term consolidation) is not finished, whereas a new episode is called, a protective maintenance process allows its completion. After a VWM object change, its protective maintenance process is followed by an encapsulation of the VWM object causing attentional resource costs in trailing competition episodes. Viewed from this perspective, a new explanation of key findings of the attentional blink will be offered. Finally, a new suggestion will be made as to how VWM items might interact with visual search processes.

Differentiating between Verbal and Spatial Encoding using Eye-Movement Recordings

Visual information processing is guided by an active mechanism generating saccadic eye movements to salient stimuli. Here we investigate the specific contribution of saccades to memory encoding of verbal and spatial properties in a serial recall task. In the first experiment, participants moved their eyes freely without specific instruction. We demonstrate the existence of qualitative differences in eye-movement strategies during verbal and spatial memory encoding. While verbal memory encoding was characterized by shifting the gaze to the to-be-encoded stimuli, saccadic activity was suppressed during spatial encoding. In the second experiment, participants were required to suppress saccades by fixating centrally during encoding or to make precise saccades onto the memory items. Active suppression of saccades had no effect on memory performance, but tracking the upcoming stimuli decreased memory performance dramatically in both tasks, indicating a resource bottleneck between display-controlled saccadic control and memory encoding. We conclude that optimized encoding strategies for verbal and spatial features are underlying memory performance in serial recall, but such strategies work on an involuntary level only and do not support memory encoding when they are explicitly required by the task.