Object file continuity and the auditory attentional blink

Three experiments were designed to investigate the causes of the auditory attentional blink (AB). Experiments 1A and 1B revealed that there was a larger auditory AB when the target and the distractors were different in two attributes than when they were different in only one attribute. Experiments 2A and 2B showed that for pure-tone distractor sequences, there were small auditory AB deficits when both the target and the probe were different from the distractors in two attributes or in one attribute; however, for pulse distractor sequences, there was a large auditory AB when both the target and the probe were different from the distractors in one attribute, but not when they were different in two attributes. Experiments 3A and 3B revealed that regardless of the relationship of the target to the subsequent distractors, a large AB was generated if it was the first sound in a sequence. Moreover, only a very small AB was apparent when the distractors following the probe were replaced by silence. These results indicated that the auditory AB is affected by both the requirement of creating and consolidating a new object file for the target and the overwriting of the probe by the distractors following it.     

Revisiting the role of probe distractors in negative priming: Location negative priming is observed when probe distractors are consistently absent

Negative priming (NP) refers to the delayed response to a probe target that was previously a prime distractor. One peculiar problem in NP literature is the observation that the manifestation of identity NP is contingent on the presence and type of probe distractors. When the probe distractors were completely removed, positive priming, rather than NP, was usually observed. This study investigated whether location NP was affected by the same manipulations. The proportion of ignored repetition trials, attended repetition trials, and control trials was manipulated across Experiments 1–3. These three experiments showed reliable location NP effect when the probe distractor was consistently absent. Experiment 4 showed that the presence of probe distractors did not increase the magnitude of the location NP effect. Experiment 5 showed that the location NP effect observed was not contingent on perceptual mismatching. These findings suggest that the presence of probe distractors is not a necessary component for the manifestation of location NP. Theoretical implications were discussed.     

The role of habituation and attentional orienting in the disruption of short-term memory performance

A series of experiments explored habituation and dishabituation to repeated auditory distractors. Participants memorised lists of visually presented items in silence or while ignoring continuously presented auditory distractors. No habituation could be observed, in that the size of the auditory distractor effect did not decrease during the experiment. However, there was evidence for attentional orienting when novel auditory material was presented after a long period of repetitive stimulation, in that a change of distractors was associated with a temporary decrease in recall performance. The results are most consistent with theoretical accounts that claim that the auditory distractor effect is caused primarily by automatic interference, but that still allow attention to play a limited role in the short-term maintenance of information.     

Semantic and phonological codes interact in single word production

The relationship between semantic-syntactic and phonological levels in speaking was investigated using a picture naming procedure with simultaneously presented visual or auditory distractor words. Previous results with auditory distractors have been used to support the independent stage model (e.g., H. Schriefers, A. S. Meyer, & W. J. M. Levelt, 1990), whereas results with visual distractors have been used to support an interactive view (e.g., P.A. Starreveld & W. La Heij, 1996b). Experiment 1 demonstrated that with auditory distractors, semantic effects preceded phonological effects, whereas the reverse pattern held for visual distractors. Experiment 2 indicated that the results for visual distractors followed the auditory pattern when distractor presentation time was limited. Experiment 3 demonstrated an interaction between phonological and semantic relatedness of distractors for auditory presentation, supporting an interactive account of lexical access in speaking.     

Proactive inhibitory control of emotional distractors: Evidence for the benefit of precuing emotional distractors

The present study investigated the role of proactive inhibitory control in processing emotional distractors by examining the benefit of precuing the following emotional distractor. In Experiments 1A and 1B, an emotional flanker task was used while schematic emotional faces were presented as targets and distractors. We found the benefit of precuing the emotional distractor. In Experiment 2, the precue could not predict the following emotional distractor. The benefit of precuing the emotional distractor diminished, suggesting that the benefit was not due to reactive inhibition of the precued distractor. In Experiments 3A and 3B, an emotional Stroop task was used while schematic emotional faces were presented as distractors. The benefit of precuing the emotional distractors was observed when these distractors were emotional faces but not observed when the distractors were scrambled faces. These findings suggested that the benefit of precuing the emotional distractors operates at the emotional level.     

A transient processing deficit following selection of an auditory target

Two experiments were conducted to examine the possibility that a transient processing deficit might result following selection of an auditory target. In both experiments, listeners were presented with a sequence of tones and required to make separate detection judgments, one regarding a target and the second regarding a subsequent probe. The target was presented following a variable number of tones, and the probe was presented in one of the seven or eight possible temporal positions following the target. The experiments differed only in that in Experiment 1 the first post-target item could be either a distractor tone or a probe, whereas in Experiment 2 the first post-target item was replaced by a silent period. In both experiments, a deficit in processing of the probe was apparent when it was presented in one of the first few positions following the target.     

The inability to ignore auditory distractors as a function of visual task perceptual load

Using a response competition paradigm, we investigated the ability to ignore target response-compatible, target response-incompatible, and neutral visual and auditory distractors presented during a visual search task. The perceptual load model of attention (e.g., Lavie & Tsal, 1994) states that task-relevant processing load determines irrelevant distractor processing in such a way that increasing processing load prevents distractor processing. In three experiments, participants searched sets of one (easy search) or six (hard search) similar items. In Experiment 1, visual distractors influenced reaction time (RT) and accuracy only for easy searches, following the perceptual load model. Surprisingly, auditory distractors yielded larger distractor compatibility effects (median RT for incompatible trials minus median RT for compatible trials) for hard searches than for easy searches. In Experiments 2 and 3, during hard searches, consistent RT benefits with response-compatible and RT costs with response-incompatible auditory distractors occurred only for hard searches. We suggest that auditory distractors are processed regardless of visual perceptual load but that the ability to inhibit cross-modal influence from auditory distractors is reduced under high visual load.     

Attentional demand and memory retrieval in negative priming

Negative priming refers to delayed response to previous distractors, and can reflect the operation of attentional selection in prime trials. One important feature of negative priming is that it is modulated by the characteristics of probe trials. The current study manipulated competition from probe distractors and prime-probe similarity to examine the effects of attentional demand and memory retrieval in probe trials. The results demonstrated that the effects of attentional demand and memory retrieval on negative priming were dynamic. Distractor competition in probe trials affected negative priming in Experiment 1, and prime-probe similarity affected negative priming in Experiment 2. Moreover, negative priming in Experiment 3 was observed either when competition from probe distractors was strong or when identical spatial layouts were used in prime-probe couplets. Taken together, either competition from probe distractors or prime-probe similarity of spatial layouts was critical to the manifestation of negative priming at one time. Implications for distractor inhibition and memory retrieval in negative priming were discussed.     

The role of selection in generating auditory negative priming

The importance of selecting between a target and a distractor in producing auditory negative priming was examined in three experiments. In Experiment 1, participants were presented with a prime pair of sounds, followed by a probe pair of sounds. For each pair, listeners were to identify the sound presented to the left ear. Under these conditions, participants were especially slow to identify a sound in the probe pair if it had been ignored in the preceding prime pair. Evidence of auditory negative priming was also apparent when the prime sound was presented in isolation to only one ear (Experiment 2) and when the probe target was presented in isolation to one ear (Experiment 3). In addition, the magnitude of the negative priming effect was increased substantially when only a single prime sound was presented. These results suggest that the emergence of auditory negative priming does not depend on selection between simultaneous target and distractor sounds.     

Artificially induced valence of distractor words increases the effects of irrelevant speech on serial recall

In a game context, nonwords either were artificially associated with negative valence or were in some sense neutral or irrelevant. Subsequently, participants memorized target words in silence or while attempting to ignore the negatively valent, irrelevant, or neutral auditory distractor nonwords. The presence of distractor nonwords impaired recall performance, but negative distractor nonwords caused more disruption than neutral and irrelevant distractors, which did not differ in how much disruption they caused. These findings conceptually replicate earlier results showing disruption due to valence with natural language words and extend them by demonstrating that auditory features that may possibly be confounded with valence in natural language words cannot be the cause of the observed disruption. Explanations of the irrelevant speech effect within working memory models that specify an explicit role of attention in the maintenance of information for immediate serial recall can explain this pattern of results, whereas structural models of working memory cannot.     

Color-based grouping and inhibition in visual search: evidence from a probe detection analysis of preview search

In four experiments, we examined selection processes in visual search using a probe detection task to measure the allocation of attention. Under preview search conditions, probes were harder to detect on old relative to new distractors (Experiment 1). This cannot be attributed solely to low-level sensory factors (Experiment 2). In addition, probe detection was sensitive to color-based grouping of old distractors and to color similarity between old distractors (Experiments 3 and 4). These effects were dissociated when the color of the old distractors changed but probe detection effects remained. Collectively, the data indicate both group-based suppression of distractors and the separate inhibition of distractor features in search.     

Perceptual load modulates the processing of distractors presented at task-irrelevant locations during the attentional blink

The distribution of attention in both space and time is critical for processing our dynamic environment. Studies of spatial attention suggest that the distribution of attention is decreased when the perceptual load of a task increases, resulting in decreased processing of task-irrelevant distractors. Studies of the attentional blink (AB) suggest that the temporal distribution of attention also influences distractor processing, such that distractor processing increases during the AB relative to outside the AB (Jiang & Chun, 2001). Two experiments are reported in which the extent to which the difficulty of the first target task (T1) modulates the processing of task-irrelevant distractors during the AB was tested. To investigate this issue, both the first and second target tasks (T1 and T2) required identifying a central stimulus that was flanked by low-load or high-load distractors. Consistent with previous studies of the AB, there was evidence of more distractor processing during the AB than outside the AB. Critically, however, the interference caused by distractors presented simultaneously with T2 during the AB was reduced when T1 perceptual load was high relative to when it was low. These results suggest that increasing T1 perceptual load decreases distractor processing during the AB and that perceptual processes influence both the temporal and spatial distribution of attention.     

Spatial and identity negative priming in audition: Evidence of feature binding in auditory spatial memory

Two experiments are reported with identical auditory stimulation in three-dimensional space but with different instructions. Participants localized a cued sound (Experiment 1) or identified a sound at a cued location (Experiment 2). A distractor sound at another location had to be ignored. The prime distractor and the probe target sound were manipulated with respect to sound identity (repeated vs. changed) and location (repeated vs. changed). The localization task revealed a symmetric pattern of partial repetition costs: Participants were impaired on trials with identity-location mismatches between the prime distractor and probe target-that is, when either the sound was repeated but not the location or vice versa. The identification task revealed an asymmetric pattern of partial repetition costs: Responding was slowed down when the prime distractor sound was repeated as the probe target, but at another location; identity changes at the same location were not impaired. Additionally, there was evidence of retrieval of incompatible prime responses in the identification task. It is concluded that feature binding of auditory prime distractor information takes place regardless of whether the task is to identify or locate a sound. Instructions determine the kind of identity-location mismatch that is detected. Identity information predominates over location information in auditory memory.     

Cross-dimensional interference and cross-trial inhibition

In two experiments, we examined whether one source of cross-dimensional interference in visual search involves cross-trial position priming. In Experiment 1, we demonstrated cross-dimensional interference in search for an orientation-defined target: Search for a left-tilted target among right-tilted non-targets was disrupted by the presence of a singleton color distractor. In all conditions, search was facilitated when a target was presented at the same position as a target in the previous trial (positive position priming). In addition, there were negative effects of position priming on orientation targets that fell on the same side as singleton distractors on the previous trial. In Experiment 2, to examine the impact of negative position priming on cross-dimensional interference, trials with and without singleton distractors were presented in a single trial block. The chance of a singleton distractor's being present on a preceding trial was then equated across displays when the distractor was and when it was not subsequently present. Cross-dimensional interference was eliminated under this mixed presentation condition, suggesting that the cost of cross-dimensional interference was not determined by the stimulus-driven factors in the current trial, at least when a limited number of target and distractor locations was used. We conclude that top-down selection is possible during visual search, and this leads to inhibition of the location of salient distractors. The cost of this is slowed detection of targets at inhibited locations on subsequent trials.     

On the role of intervening distractors in the attentional blink

The attentional blink (AB) refers to the decline in accurate report for a second target (T2) when presented within about 500 ms of a first target (T1) embedded in a rapid serial visual presentation stream of distractors. It is debated whether the distractors presented shortly after T1 cause the AB directly, as is proposed by distractor-based models, or can modulate its amplitude only indirectly by increasing T1 difficulty, as is proposed by capacity-based models. To investigate this issue, an intervening distractor was presented at lag 1 (T1 + 1), at lag 2 (T1 + 2), or at neither of these two lags (no distractor). T2 was presented at either lag 3 or 9. An AB was observed even in the absence of intervening distractors, indicating that distractors are not necessary to produce an AB. Nonetheless, the T1 + 2 distractor did modulate the AB directly, without influencing T1 performance. Neither theory can fully account for the results but can do so given some modifications.     

Perceptual grouping and visual selective attention

The present study demonstrates that incongruent distractor letters at a constant distance from a target letter produce more response competition and negative priming when they share a target’s color than when they have a different color. Moreover, perceptual grouping by means of color, attenuated the effects of spatial proximity. For example, when all items were presented in the same color, near distractors produced more response competition and negative priming than far distractors (Experiment 3A). However, when near distractors were presented in a different color and far distractors were presented in the same color as the target, the response competition × distractor proximity interaction was eliminated and the proximity × negative priming interaction was reversed (Experiment 3B). A final experiment demonstrated that distractors appearing on the same object as a selected target produced comparable amounts of response competition and negative priming whether they were near or far from the target. This suggests that the inhibitory mechanisms of visual attention can be directed to perceptual groups/objects in the environment and not only to unsegmented regions of visual space.     

Attentional capture with various distractor and target types

Effects of nonpredictive distractors that involved changes in luminance, size, or shape were examined in three experiments. In Experiment 1, with two types of distractors (onsets and offsets), accuracy was better on trials when the distractor was near the location of either an offset or an onset target than on trials when the distractor was in a different location from that of the target, demonstrating attentional capture. Capture occurred both when the type of target (onset or offset) was blocked and therefore predictable and also when the type of target was mixed within blocks and therefore not predictable. Further experiments indicated that distractors captured attention even when the change to distractor did not create a new perceptual object. Neither a singleton-detection mode, nor a contingent involuntary orienting hypothesis, nor creation of a new object seems to explain all of these data adequately. Rather, capture may depend on a number of factors in the task.     

Auditory distractor processing in sequential selection tasks

In this review, we analyze the cognitive processes contributing to selection in audition. In particular, we focus on the processing of auditory distractors in sequential selection paradigms in which target stimuli are accompanied by distractors. We review the evidence from two established tasks, namely the auditory negative priming and the auditory distractor–response binding task, and discuss the cognitive mechanisms contributing to the results typically observed in these tasks. In fact, several processes have been suggested as to explain how distractors are processed and handled in audition; that is, auditory distractors can be inhibited, encoded with a do-not-respond-tag, integrated into a stimulus–response episode containing the response to the target, or upheld in working memory and matched/mismatched with the following distractor. In addition, variables possibly modulating these cognitive processes are discussed. Finally, auditory distractor processing is compared with distractor processing in vision.     

Attentional capture with various distractor and target types

Effects of nonpredictive distractors that involved changes in luminance, size, or shape were examined in three experiments. In Experiment 1, with two types of distractors (onsets and offsets), accuracy was better on trials when the distractor was near the location of either an offset or an onset target than on trials when the distractor was in a different location from that of the target, demonstrating attentional capture. Capture occurred both when the type of target (onset or offset) was blocked and therefore predictable and also when the type of target was mixed within blocks and therefore not predictable. Further experiments indicated that distractors captured attention even when the change to distractor did not create a new perceptual object. Neither a singleton-detection mode, nor a contingent involuntary orienting hypothesis, nor creation of a new object seems to explain all of these data adequately. Rather, capture may depend on a number of factors in the task.     

The control of saccade trajectories: direction of curvature depends on prior knowledge of target location and saccade latency

Recent reports have shown that saccades can deviate either toward or away from distractors. However, the specific conditions responsible for the change in initial saccade direction are not known. One possibility, examined here, is that the direction of curvature (toward or away from distractors) reflects preparatory tuning of the oculomotor system when the location of the target and distractor are known in advance. This was investigated by examining saccade trajectories under predictable and unpredictable target conditions. In Experiment 1, the targets and the distractors appeared unpredictably, whereas in Experiment 2 an arrow cue presented at fixation indicated the location of the forthcoming target prior to stimulus onset. Saccades were made to targets on the horizontal, vertical, and principal oblique axis, and distractors appeared simultaneously at an adjacent location (a separation of +/- 45 degrees of visual angle). On average, saccade trajectories curved toward distractors when target locations were unpredictable and curved away from distractors when target locations were known in advance. There was no overall difference in mean saccade latencies between the two experiments. The magnitude of the distractor modulation of saccade trajectory (either toward or away from) was comparable across the different saccade directions (horizontal, vertical, and oblique). These results are interpreted in terms of the time course of competitive interactions operating in the neural structures involved in the suppression of distractors and the selection of a saccade target. A relatively slow mechanism that inhibits movements to distractors produces curvature away from the distractor. This mechanism has more time to operate when target location is predictable, increasing the likelihood that the saccade trajectory will deviate away from the distractor.