Diversion of Attention Leads to Conflict between Concurrently Attended Stimuli, Not Delayed Orienting to the Object of Interest

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Jennifer-Ashley Hoffmeister ◽  
Andrea N. Smit ◽  
Ashley C. Livingstone ◽  
John J. McDonald
Keyword(s):  
Visual Search ◽  
Focus Of Attention ◽  
Search Array ◽  
Distractor Location ◽  
Control Processes ◽  
Subsequent Target ◽  
Selection Of

Abstract The control processes that guide attention to a visual-search target can result in the selection of an irrelevant object with similar features (a distractor). Once attention is captured by such a distractor, search for a subsequent target is momentarily impaired if the two stimuli appear at different locations. The textbook explanation for this impairment is based on the notion of an indivisible focus of attention that moves to the distractor, illuminates a nontarget that subsequently appears at that location, and then moves to the target once the nontarget is rejected. Here, we show that such delayed orienting to the target does not underlie the behavioral cost of distraction. Observers identified a color-defined target appearing within the second of two stimulus arrays. The first array contained irrelevant items, including one that shared the target's color. ERPs were examined to test two predictions stemming from the textbook serial-orienting hypothesis. Namely, when the target and distractor appear at different locations, (1) the target should elicit delayed selection activity relative to same-location trials, and (2) the nontarget search item appearing at the distractor location should elicit selection activity that precedes selection activity tied to the target. Here, the posterior contralateral N2 component was used to track selection of each of these search-array items and the previous distractor. The results supported neither prediction above, thereby disconfirming the serial-orienting hypothesis. Overall, the results show that the behavioral costs of distraction are caused by perceptual and postperceptual competition between concurrently attended target and nontarget stimuli.

Dynamic Dissociation of Visual Selection From Saccade Programming in Frontal Eye Field

2001 ◽  
Vol 86 (5) ◽  
pp. 2634-2637 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aditya Murthy ◽  
Kirk G. Thompson ◽  
Jeffrey D. Schall
Keyword(s):  
Visual Search ◽  
Selection Process ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Frontal Eye Fields ◽  
Search Array ◽  
Visual Neurons ◽  
Current Location ◽  
Eye Field ◽  
Saccade Programming ◽  
Selection Of

Previous studies of visually responsive neurons in the frontal eye fields have identified a selection process preceding saccades during visual search. The goal of this experiment was to determine whether the selection process corresponds to the selection of a conspicuous stimulus or to preparation of the next saccade. This was accomplished with the use of a novel task, called search-step, in which the target of a singleton visual search array switches location with a distracter on random trials. The target step trials created a condition in which the same stimulus yielded saccades either toward or away from the target. Visually responsive neurons in frontal eye field selected the current location of the conspicuous target even when gaze shifted to the location of a distractor. This dissociation demonstrates that the selection process manifest in visual neurons in the frontal eye field may be an explicit interpretation of the image and not an obligatory saccade command.

scholarly journals Attention and its Role: Theories and Models

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (12) ◽  
pp. 169
Author(s):  
Athanasios Drigas ◽  
Maria Karyotaki
Keyword(s):  
Visual Search ◽  
Inhibition Of Return ◽  
Saliency Map ◽  
Saccadic Suppression ◽  
Covert Attention ◽  
Attentional Deployment ◽  
Affect And Cognition ◽  
Visual Scenes ◽  
Selection Of ◽  
Complete Account

Motivation, affect and cognition are interrelated. However, the control of attentional deployment and more specifically, attempting to provide a more complete account of the interactions between the dorsal and ventral processing streams is still a challenge. The interaction between overt and covert attention is particularly important for models concerned with visual search. Further modeling of such interactions can assist to scrutinize many mechanisms, such as saccadic suppression, dynamic remapping of the saliency map and inhibition of return, covert pre-selection of targets for overt saccades and online understanding of complex visual scenes.

scholarly journals Object-based Selection of Irrelevant Features Is Not Confined to the Attended Object

2011 ◽  
Vol 23 (9) ◽  
pp. 2231-2239 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carsten N. Boehler ◽  
Mircea A. Schoenfeld ◽  
Hans-Jochen Heinze ◽  
Jens-Max Hopf
Keyword(s):  
Visual Search ◽  
Visual Field ◽  
Target Object ◽  
Neural Processing ◽  
Irrelevant Feature ◽  
Distractor Object ◽  
Object Based ◽  
Irrelevant Color ◽  
Task Irrelevant ◽  
Selection Of

Attention to one feature of an object can bias the processing of unattended features of that object. Here we demonstrate with ERPs in visual search that this object-based bias for an irrelevant feature also appears in an unattended object when it shares that feature with the target object. Specifically, we show that the ERP response elicited by a distractor object in one visual field is modulated as a function of whether a task-irrelevant color of that distractor is also present in the target object that is presented in the opposite visual field. Importantly, we find this modulation to arise with a delay of approximately 80 msec relative to the N2pc—a component of the ERP response that reflects the focusing of attention onto the target. In a second experiment, we demonstrate that this modulation reflects enhanced neural processing in the unattended object. These observations together facilitate the surprising conclusion that the object-based selection of irrelevant features is spatially global even after attention has selected the target object.

The automaticity of complex motor skill learning as a function of attentional focus

2001 ◽  
Vol 54 (4) ◽  
pp. 1143-1154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriele Wulf ◽  
Nancy McNevin ◽  
Charles H. Shea
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Dynamic Balance ◽  
Attentional Focus ◽  
Focus Of Attention ◽  
Skill Learning ◽  
External Focus ◽  
Control Processes ◽  
Attention Focus ◽  
Balance Task ◽  
Internal Focus

The present experiment was designed to test the predictions of the constrained-action hypothesis. This hypothesis proposes that when performers utilize an internal focus of attention (focus on their movements) they may actually constrain or interfere with automatic control processes that would normally regulate the movement, whereas an external focus of attention (focus on the movement effect) allows the motor system to more naturally self-organize. To test this hypothesis, a dynamic balance task (stabilometer) was used with participants instructed to adopt either an internal or external focus of attention. Consistent with earlier experiments, the external focus group produced generally smaller balance errors than did the internal focus group and responded at a higher frequency indicating higher confluence between voluntary and reflexive mechanisms. In addition, probe reaction times (RTs) were taken as a measure of the attention demands required under the two attentional focus conditions. Consistent with the hypothesis, the external focus participants demonstrated lower probe RTs than did the internal focus participants, indicating a higher degree of automaticity and less conscious interference in the control processes associated with the balance task.

scholarly journals Anticipatory distractor suppression elicited by statistical regularities in visual search

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benchi Wang ◽  
Joram van Driel ◽  
Eduard Ort ◽  
Jan Theeuwes
Keyword(s):  
Visual Search ◽  
Event Related Potentials ◽  
Cortical Activity ◽  
Irrelevant Information ◽  
Distractor Location ◽  
Alpha Oscillations ◽  
Statistical Regularities ◽  
Related Potentials ◽  
Human Participants

AbstractSalient yet irrelevant objects often capture our attention and interfere with our daily tasks. Distraction by salient objects can be reduced by suppressing the location where they are likely to appear. The question we addressed here was whether suppression of frequent distractors is already implemented beforehand, in anticipation of the stimulus. Using electroencephalography (EEG), we recorded cortical activity of human participants searching for a target while ignoring a salient distractor. The distractor was presented more often at one location than at any other location. We found reduced capture for distractors at frequent locations, indicating that participants learned to avoid distraction. Critically, we found evidence for proactive suppression as already prior to display onset, there was enhanced power in parieto-occipital alpha oscillations contralateral to the frequent distractor location – a signal known to occur in anticipation of irrelevant information. Locked to display onset, event-related potentials analysis showed a distractor-suppression-related PD component for this location. Importantly, this PD was found regardless of whether distracting information was presented at the frequent location. In addition, there was an early PD component representing an early attentional index of the frequent distractor location. Our results are show anticipatory (proactive) suppression of frequent distractor locations in visual search already starting prior to display onset.

scholarly journals Emotion in visual search: The selection of affective faces for awareness

2010 ◽  
Vol 5 (8) ◽  
pp. 388-388
Author(s):  
M. G. Reynolds ◽  
A. Frischen ◽  
C. Gerritsen ◽  
D. Smilek ◽  
J. D. Eastwood
Keyword(s):  
Visual Search ◽  
Selection Of

scholarly journals Reward Does Not Modulate the Preview Benefit in Visual Search

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chisato Mine ◽  
Steven Most ◽  
Mike Le Pelley
Keyword(s):  
Visual Search ◽  
Correct Response ◽  
Target Location ◽  
Search Display ◽  
Stimulus Array ◽  
Reward Learning ◽  
Preview Benefit ◽  
Search Array ◽  
Manipulation Check ◽  
Full Search

Preview benefit refers to faster search for a target when a subset of distractors is seen prior to the search display. We investigated whether reward modulates this effect. Participants identified a target among non-targets on each trial. On “preview” trials, placeholders occupied half the search array positions prior to the onset of the full array. On “non-preview” trials, no placeholders preceded the full search array. On preview trials, the target could appear at either a placeholder position (old-target-location condition) or a position where no placeholder had been (new-target-location condition). Critically, the color of the stimulus array indicated whether participants would earn reward for a correct response. We found a typical preview benefit, but no evidence that reward modulated this effect, despite a manipulation check showing that stimuli in the reward-signaling color tended to capture attention on catch trials. The results suggest that reward learning does not modulate the preview benefit.

Attentional Focus in NCAA Division 1 Golfers

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 240-251 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jed A. Diekfuss ◽  
Louisa D. Raisbeck
Keyword(s):  
Attentional Focus ◽  
Focus Of Attention ◽  
Popular Media ◽  
Psychological State ◽  
Specific Context ◽  
Secondary Purpose ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Semistructured Interviews ◽  
Focus Strategies ◽  
Selection Of

The primary purpose of this study was to describe the focus of attention NCAA Division 1 golfers use during practice and competition. A secondary purpose was to determine who was most influential in the focus of attention strategies adopted by NCAA Division 1 golfers. We collected observational data by attending practice sessions, conducting semistructured interviews, and administering guided focus groups. Results revealed two major themes pertaining to the focus of attention adopted by our sample of NCAA Division 1 golfers: situational focus and reactivity focus. Situational focus refers to the focus used within a specific context, and reactivity focus refers to the focus golfers adopt because of a psychological state. Further, our results revealed the importance of esteemed individuals’ instruction on the development of attentional focus strategies. Parents, coaches, and popular media were highly influential in our sample of NCAA Division 1 golfers’ selection of attentional focus strategies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document