Faculty Opinions recommendation of Implicit attentional selection of bound visual features.

2005 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Reynolds
Keyword(s):  
Attentional Selection ◽  
Visual Features ◽  
Selection Of

scholarly journals Implicit Attentional Selection of Bound Visual Features

Neuron ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 46 (5) ◽  
pp. 723-729 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Melcher ◽  
Thomas V. Papathomas ◽  
Zoltán Vidnyánszky
Keyword(s):  
Attentional Selection ◽  
Visual Features ◽  
Selection Of

scholarly journals Rapid Parallel Attentional Selection Can Be Controlled by Shape and Alphanumerical Category

2016 ◽  
Vol 28 (11) ◽  
pp. 1672-1687 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Jenkins ◽  
Anna Grubert ◽  
Martin Eimer
Keyword(s):  
Attentional Control ◽  
Time Course ◽  
Target Selection ◽  
Attentional Selection ◽  
Visual Features ◽  
Multiple Target ◽  
Neural Basis ◽  
Selection Processes ◽  
Selection Tasks ◽  
Selection Of

Previous research has shown that when two color-defined target objects appear in rapid succession at different locations, attention is deployed independently and in parallel to both targets. This study investigated whether this rapid simultaneous attentional target selection mechanism can also be employed in tasks where targets are defined by a different visual feature (shape) or when alphanumerical category is the target selection attribute. Two displays that both contained a target and a nontarget object on opposite sides were presented successively, and the SOA between the two displays was 100, 50, 20, or 10 msec in different blocks. N2pc components were recorded to both targets as a temporal marker of their attentional selection. When observers searched for shape-defined targets (Experiment 1), N2pc components to the two targets were equal in size and overlapped in time when the SOA between the two displays was short, reflecting two parallel shape-guided target selection processes with their own independent time course. Essentially the same temporal pattern of N2pc components was observed when alphanumerical category was the target-defining attribute (Experiment 2), demonstrating that the rapid parallel attentional selection of multiple target objects is not restricted to situations where the deployment of attention can be guided by elementary visual features but that these processes can even be employed in category-based attentional selection tasks. These findings have important implications for our understanding of the cognitive and neural basis of top–down attentional control.

scholarly journals Attentional selection of multiple objects in the human visual system

NeuroImage ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 163 ◽  
pp. 231-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xilin Zhang ◽  
Nicole Mlynaryk ◽  
Shruti Japee ◽  
Leslie G. Ungerleider
Keyword(s):  
Visual System ◽  
Human Visual System ◽  
Attentional Selection ◽  
Multiple Objects ◽  
Selection Of

Attentional selection of motion states

1998 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 329-347 ◽  
Author(s):  
M.W. Von Grünau ◽  
P. Pakneshan ◽  
A. Bertone
Keyword(s):  
Attentional Selection ◽  
Selection Of

scholarly journals Capture by Context Elements, Not Attentional Suppression of Distractors, Explains the PD with Small Search Displays

2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (6) ◽  
pp. 1170-1183 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dirk Kerzel ◽  
Nicolas Burra
Keyword(s):  
Attentional Capture ◽  
Attentional Selection ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Voltage Difference ◽  
Context Element ◽  
Selection Of

Top–down control of attention allows us to resist attentional capture by salient stimuli that are irrelevant to our current goals. Recently, it was proposed that attentional suppression of salient distractors contributes to top–down control by biasing attention away from the distractor. With small search displays, attentional suppression of salient distractors may even result in reduced RTs on distractor-present trials. In support of attentional suppression, electrophysiological measures revealed a positivity between 200 and 300 msec contralateral to the distractor, which has been referred to as distractor positivity (PD). We reexamined distractor benefits with small search displays and found that the positivity to the distractor was followed by a negativity to the distractor. The negativity, referred to as N2pc, is considered an index of attentional selection of the contralateral element. Thus, attentional suppression of the distractor (PD) preceded attentional capture (N2pc) by the distractor, which is at odds with the idea that attentional suppression avoids attentional capture by the distractor. Instead, we suggest that the initial “PD” is not a positivity to the distractor but rather a negativity (N2pc) to the contralateral context element, suggesting that, initially, the context captured attention. Subsequently, the distractor was selected because, paradoxically, participants searched all lateral target positions (even when irrelevant) before they examined the vertical positions. Consistent with this idea, search times were shorter for lateral than vertical targets. In summary, the early voltage difference in small search displays is unrelated to distractor suppression but may reflect capture by the context.

Tonal Expectations Influence Early Pitch Processing

2011 ◽  
Vol 23 (10) ◽  
pp. 3095-3104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frédéric Marmel ◽  
Fabien Perrin ◽  
Barbara Tillmann
Keyword(s):  
Discrimination Task ◽  
Pitch Perception ◽  
Attentional Selection ◽  
Pitch Discrimination ◽  
Musical Note ◽  
Pitch Processing ◽  
Selection Of

The present study investigated the ERP correlates of the influence of tonal expectations on pitch processing. Participants performed a pitch discrimination task between penultimate and final tones of melodies. These last two tones were a repetition of the same musical note, but penultimate tones were always in tune whereas final tones were slightly out of tune in half of the trials. The pitch discrimination task allowed us to investigate the influence of tonal expectations in attentive listening and, for penultimate tones, without being confounded by decisional processes (occurring on final tones). Tonal expectations were manipulated by a tone change in the first half of the melodies that changed their tonality, hence changing the tonal expectedness of penultimate and final tones without modifying them acoustically. Manipulating tonal expectations with minimal acoustic changes allowed us to focus on the cognitive expectations based on listeners' knowledge of tonal structures. For penultimate tones, tonal expectations modulated processing within the first 100 msec after onset resulting in an Nb/P1 complex that differed in amplitude between tonally related and less related conditions. For final tones, out-of-tune tones elicited an N2/P3 complex and, on in-tune tones only, tonal manipulation elicited an ERAN/RATN-like negativity overlapping with the N2. Our results suggest that cognitive tonal expectations can influence pitch perception at several steps of processing, starting with early attentional selection of pitch.

scholarly journals Attentional selection of relative SF mediates global versus local processing: EEG evidence

2011 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 228-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Flevaris ◽  
S. Bentin ◽  
L. Robertson
Keyword(s):  
Attentional Selection ◽  
Local Processing ◽  
Selection Of

scholarly journals Brain and Cognitive Mechanisms of Top–Down Attentional Control in a Multisensory World: Benefits of Electrical Neuroimaging

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 412-430 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pawel J. Matusz ◽  
Nora Turoman ◽  
Ruxandra I. Tivadar ◽  
Chrysa Retsa ◽  
Micah M. Murray
Keyword(s):  
Real World ◽  
Attentional Control ◽  
Attentional Selection ◽  
Attention Capture ◽  
Object Representations ◽  
Cognitive Mechanisms ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Electrical Neuroimaging ◽  
The Brain ◽  
Selection Of

In real-world environments, information is typically multisensory, and objects are a primary unit of information processing. Object recognition and action necessitate attentional selection of task-relevant from among task-irrelevant objects. However, the brain and cognitive mechanisms governing these processes remain not well understood. Here, we demonstrate that attentional selection of visual objects is controlled by integrated top–down audiovisual object representations (“attentional templates”) while revealing a new brain mechanism through which they can operate. In multistimulus (visual) arrays, attentional selection of objects in humans and animal models is traditionally quantified via “the N2pc component”: spatially selective enhancements of neural processing of objects within ventral visual cortices at approximately 150–300 msec poststimulus. In our adaptation of Folk et al.'s [Folk, C. L., Remington, R. W., & Johnston, J. C. Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 1030–1044, 1992] spatial cueing paradigm, visual cues elicited weaker behavioral attention capture and an attenuated N2pc during audiovisual versus visual search. To provide direct evidence for the brain, and so, cognitive, mechanisms underlying top–down control in multisensory search, we analyzed global features of the electrical field at the scalp across our N2pcs. In the N2pc time window (170–270 msec), color cues elicited brain responses differing in strength and their topography. This latter finding is indicative of changes in active brain sources. Thus, in multisensory environments, attentional selection is controlled via integrated top–down object representations, and so not only by separate sensory-specific top–down feature templates (as suggested by traditional N2pc analyses). We discuss how the electrical neuroimaging approach can aid research on top–down attentional control in naturalistic, multisensory settings and on other neurocognitive functions in the growing area of real-world neuroscience.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document