On finding negative priming from distractors

When do response-related episodic retrieval effects co-occur with inhibition of return?

At some point, spatial priming effects more faithfully reflect response selection processes than they do attentional orienting or sensory processes. Findings from the spatial cueing literature suggest that two factors may be critical: (1) the amount of identity processing that is required in order to respond correctly (feature-based response hypothesis), and (2) the amount of spatial processing that is required in order to respond correctly (space-based response hypothesis). To test the first hypothesis, we manipulated whether observers made single keypress detection or two-choice localization responses to serially presented stimuli in peripheral vision and whether stimulus identity information processing was necessary before responding. Responses were always slowest when the target location repeated, consistent with an attentional orienting bias independent of keypress responding (i.e., inhibition of return; IOR). The localization procedure revealed a subtle additional cost for changing the target location and repeating a response, consistent with a response-related episodic retrieval effect predicted by the Theory of Event Coding (TEC). Neither effect was modulated by the need to discriminate features. To test the second hypothesis, we made spatial processing indispensable to response selection by requiring a decision between a detection and localization response, depending on where the target appeared. IOR was eliminated for detection, but not localization, responses, consistent with the TEC. Collectively, the findings suggest that the amount of space-based, but not feature-based, processing that is required to determine a response is responsible for the response retrieval effects that can co-occur with IOR.

Can the Use of Seven Key Manipulations and Predicted Pattern Testing Bring More Clarity to Negative Priming Investigations?

Christie and Klein (2008) recommended using the 7 key conditions used by Neumann and DeSchepper (1991) and Stadler and Hogan (1996) to investigate the full range of effects produced by recently rejected distractors (negative priming) and recently attended targets (positive priming) in selective attention tasks. They suggested that incorporating all seven conditions should help to overcome the current muddle of possible explanations for positive and negative priming effects. Crucially, although the overall patterns of results reported by Neumann and DeSchepper and Stadler and Hogan were identical, some of the conditions in Stadler and Hogan’s experiment produced much larger effects, particularly in the attended repetition (positive priming) conditions, compared with those of Neumann and DeSchepper. Here we use statistical support provided by an analytic approach known as predicted pattern testing (Levin & Neumann, 1999) to argue that asymmetric transfer produced by participant expectancy effects could account for the magnitude of Stadler and Hogan’s positive priming outcomes, rather than the commonly accepted assumption made by Christie and Klein, and others, that prime-probe congruencies involving targets should affect performance (responses to probe targets) more than prime-probe congruencies involving distractors.

Identity and semantic negative priming in rapid serial visual presentation streams

In selective attention tasks, the efficiency of processing concurrently presented target and distractor stimuli in a given display is often influenced by the relationship these stimuli have with those in the previous display. When a to-be-attended target on a current trial (the probe trial) matches the ignored, non-target distractor on a previous trial (the prime trial), a response to the target is typically delayed compared with when the two stimuli are not associated. This negative priming (NP) phenomenon has been observed in numerous studies with traditional NP tasks presenting the target and distractor simultaneously in both the prime and probe trial couplets. Here, however, in four experiments using a mixture of stimulus types (letters, digits, English number words, and logographic Chinese number words), target and distractor stimuli were temporally separated in two rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) streams instead of concurrently presented. The findings provide a conceptual replication and substantial extension of a recent study by Wong (Plos One, 7, e37023, 2012), and suggest that active suppression of irrelevant distracting information is a more ubiquitous form of cognitive control than previously thought.

Target localization among concurrent sound sources: no evidence for the inhibition of previous distractor responses

The visuospatial negative priming effect-that is, the slowed-down responding to a previously ignored location-is partly due to response inhibition associated with the previously ignored location (Buckolz, Goldfarb, & Khan, Perception & Psychophysics 66:837-845 2004). We tested whether response inhibition underlies spatial negative priming in the auditory modality as well. Eighty participants localized a target sound while ignoring a simultaneous distractor sound at another location. Eight possible sound locations were arranged in a semicircle around the participant. Pairs of adjacent locations were associated with the same response. On ignored repetition trials, the probe target sound was played from the same location as the previously ignored prime sound. On response control trials, prime distractor and probe target were played from different locations but were associated with the same response. On control trials, prime distractor and probe target shared neither location nor response. A response inhibition account predicts slowed-down responding when the response associated with the prime distractor has to be executed in the probe. There was no evidence of response inhibition in audition. Instead, the negative priming effect depended on whether the sound at the repeatedly occupied location changed identity between prime and probe. The latter result replicates earlier findings and supports the feature mismatching hypothesis, while the former is compatible with the assumption that response inhibition is irrelevant in auditory spatial attention.

Classic Stroop Negative Priming effects for children and adults diverge with less-conflicting and nonconflicting conditions

Negative priming indexes an inhibition process that aids target selection by reducing distractor interference. To date, children have produced negative priming only in tasks where distractor response tendencies are consistently greater than or equal to targets and not in tasks containing a substantial proportion of low-conflict distractors. To establish the exact parameters under which children's negative priming attenuates relative to adults, we varied processing demands across 2 experiments involving children and adults. Negative priming was comparable when 100% high-conflict conditions were encountered (Experiment 1) and was intact in adults but not children when a ratio of 50:50 high- to low-conflict conditions was encountered (Experiment 2). Compared with adults, children seem induced to divide attention more generally when low-conflict attentional conditions are included, attenuating negative priming.

Binding targets' responses to distractors' locations: distractor response bindings in a location-priming task

Responses to target stimuli can be encoded together with distracting objects accompanying these targets into a single stimulus-response episode or a single event file. Repeating any object of such an episode can trigger the response encoded in this episode. Hence, repeating a distractor may retrieve the response given to the target that was accompanied by this distractor. In the present experiments, we analyzed whether the binding of target responses to the distractor can be generalized even to the location of a distractor. In two experiments, we used a location-based prime-probe task and found that repeating the location of a distractor triggered the response to the target that had previously been accompanied by a distractor in the repeated location, even if the identity of the distractor changed from the prime to the probe.

Dissociations between identity and location negative priming

Negative priming refers to the phenomenon of a slowed response time to a previously ignored distractor. Identity negative priming can be observed when the identity of a previous distractor is repeated as the target identity, and location negative priming can be observed when the spatial location of a previous distractor is repeated as the target location. This article reviewed and integrated previous findings and provided empirical evidence to show the dissociations between location and identity negative priming: (a) the removal of probe distractor impeded identity negative priming but not location negative priming; (b) identity negative priming was modulated by the distance between the target and distractor, while location negative priming was not; and (c) perceptual grouping of the target and distractor affected identity negative priming but not location negative priming.

Flanker negative priming from spatially unpredictable primes: an ERP study

In a typical flanker task, a to-be-selected central target is flanked by two to-be ignored, identical distractors. The flanker negative priming (NP) effect denotes increased reaction time and error percent when the distractor of a first display serves as the target in the next. Most theories of NP are consistent with the idea that during processing of the first display, the identity of the distractors is inhibited. If the target of the subsequent display has the same identity, NP occurs because of persisting or retrieved inhibition. However, in the standard flanker task stimuli appear at the same screen locations for all trials, allowing for anticipatory spatial selection. No strong additional inhibition of stimulus identities may then be required. Therefore, besides the standard flanker task we employed a modified task in which the location of the stimulus triplet slightly differed across trials, thus disabling spatial pre-selection. Event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded to identify brain correlates of NP in the two tasks. Behavioral NP was present in the modified task but absent in the standard task. An ERP correlate specific to NP in the modified task concerned larger amplitude of a left-posterior processing negativity. Results support the idea that stronger inhibition of distractor identities contributes to NP in the flanker task when spatial pre-selection is disabled.

A repetition-suppression account of between-trial effects in a modified Stroop paradigm

Theories that postulate cognitive inhibition are very common in psychology and cognitive neuroscience [e.g., Hasher, L., Lustig, C., & Zacks, R. T. (2007). Inhibitory mechanisms and the control of attention. In A. Conway, C. Jarrold, M. Kane, A. Miyake, A. Towse, & J. Towse (Eds.), Variation in working memory (pp. 227-249). New York, NY: Oxford, University Press], although they have recently been severely criticized [e.g., MacLeod, C. M., Dodd, M. D., Sheard, E. D., Wilson, D. E., & Bibi, U. (2003). In opposition to inhibition. In H. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 43, pp. 163-214). Elsevier Science]. This paper poses and attempts to answer the question whether a research program with cognitive inhibition as its main theoretical assumption is still worth pursuing. We present a set of empirical data from a modified Stroop paradigm that replicates previously reported findings. These findings refer to between-trial effects previously described in the literature on Stroop, negative priming, and inhibition-of-return. Existing theoretical accounts fail to explain all these effects in an integrated way. A repetition-suppression mechanism is proposed in order to account for these data. This mechanism is instantiated as a computational cognitive model. The theoretical implications of this model are discussed.