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.     

Attentional selection: A salience-based competition for representation

The role of salience in localized attentional interference (LAI) was examined. In two experiments, target discrimination performance was measured as a function of the spatial separation between the target and a salient distractor item. In Experiment 1, both the salience of the distractor and that of a target were manipulated. Distractor salience was manipulated via size changes to the distractor, and target salience was manipulated by using unmasked or onset targets. When the target was of low salience, the magnitude of interference from the distractor increased with distractor salience. However, when the target had an abrupt onset, the distractor had no impact on target performance. In Experiment 2, the attentional salience of the distractor was manipulated using a probability manipulation. Displays contained both a target and a color singleton distractor. The color singleton produced LAI when it was predictive of the target location but not when it was unpredictive of the target location. The results of both experiments are consistent with models of competition-based attentional selection.     

Spatial selection via feature-driven inhibition of distractor locations

The allocation of spatial attention was measured with detection probes at different locations. Response times were faster for probes at the location of the target digit, which subjects reported, than at the locations of distractor digits, which they ignored. Probes at blank locations between stimuli produced fast responses, indicating that selection was accomplished by inhibiting distractor locations but not other areas. Unlike earlier studies using location cuing with simpler stimuli, these experiments showed no attentional differences across horizontal or vertical midlines. Attention varied little with distance from the target, although blank locations far from the target were somewhat less attended than were those near the target, and attention was only slightly affected by expectations for stimulus location. This task demonstrates a form of feature-driven spatial attention, in which locations with objects lacking target features are inhibited.     

启动刺激含有多个靶子条件下的负启动效应

采用数字命名任务,在通常的负启动范式基础上增加启动刺激靶子数目．进行了两个实验。实验一发现,当启动刺激靶子个数为1个和2个时。出现负启动效应;当启动刺激靶子个数为3个和4个时。则不出现负启动效应。这提示靶子所获注意资源数量的作用。实验二发现．当启动刺激有2个和3个靶子时．如果未被选择来反应的靶子成为探测刺激的靶子,其反应时与控制组无显著差异。即不出现负启动。这表明在启动刺激中未被选择来反应的靶子与干扰项所受到的加工是有差别的。     

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.     

Disengaging the negative priming mechanism in location tasks

In a location-based negative priming task, targets that appear at locations that were previously occupied by distractors are typically responded to more slowly than are targets that appear at formerly unoccupied positions. In the present study, we attempted to disengage the location-based negative priming mechanism by presenting visual cues indicating the most likely location of the upcoming target. The first experiment showed that 75% cue-target validity was not sufficient to affect the negative priming mechanism. However, the second experiment demonstrated that a much reduced, but not eliminated, negative priming effect occurred with 100%cue-target validity. These findings are similar to those found with inhibition of return, suggesting that location-based inhibition of return effects and location-based negative priming effects may share a common inhibition mechanism.     

How do we select multiple features? Transient costs for selecting two colors rather than one,persistent costs for color–location conjunctions

In a previous study Lo, Howard, & Holcombe (Vision Research 63:20–33, 2012), selecting two colors did not induce a performance cost, relative to selecting one color. For example, requiring possible report of both a green and a red target did not yield a worse performance than when both targets were green. Yet a cost of selecting multiple colors was observed when selection needed be contingent on both color and location. When selecting a red target to the left and a green target to the right, superimposing a green distractor to the left and a red distractor to the right impeded performance. Possibly, participants cannot confine attention to a color at a particular location. As a result, distractors that share the target colors disrupt attentional selection of the targets. The attempt to select the targets must then be repeated, which increases the likelihood that the trial terminates when selection is not effective, even for long trials. Consistent with this, here we find a persistent cost of selecting two colors when the conjunction of color and location is needed, but the cost is confined to short exposure durations when the observer just has to monitor red and green stimuli without the need to use the location information. These results suggest that selecting two colors is time-consuming but effective, whereas selection of simultaneous conjunctions is never entirely successful.     

The linear separability effect in color visual search: Ruling out the additive color hypothesis

Bauer, Jolicoeur, and Cowan (1996b, 1996c) demonstrated difficult visual search for color targets that were not linearly separable (in color space) from two distractor colors and easier search for linearly separable targets. This suggested that search is mediated by a chromatically linear discrimination mechanism (see D’Zmura, 1991). However, in those experiments, the targets that were not linearly separable fell midway between the distractor colors and thus corresponded to the admix of the distractor colors. An alternate interpretation of the results of Bauer et al. is that search was more difficult when the target corresponded to the distractor admix than when it did not. We tested this hypothesis in three experiments by contrasting conditions in which a target that was not linearly separable did or did not correspond to the admix of the distractor colors. In all cases, a target that was not linearly separable produced difficult search, demonstrating that linear separability determines search performance.     

Can attentional control settings be maintained for two color–location conjunctions? Evidence from an RSVP task

Previous investigations of the ability to maintain separate attentional control settings for different spatial locations have relied principally on a go/no-go spatial-cueing paradigm. The results have suggested that control of attention is accomplished only late in processing. However, the go/no-go task does not provide strong incentives to withhold attention from irrelevant color–location conjunctions. We used a modified version of the task in which failing to adopt multiple control settings would be detrimental to performance. Two RSVP streams of colored letters appeared to the left and right of fixation. Participants searched for targets that were a conjunction of color and location, so that the target color for one stream acted as a distractor when presented in the opposite stream. Distractors that did not match the target conjunctions nevertheless captured attention and interfered with performance. This was the case even when the target conjunctions were previewed early in the trial prior to the target (Exp. 2). However, distractor interference was reduced when the upcoming distractor was previewed early on in the trial (Exp. 3). Attentional selection of targets by color–location conjunctions may be effective if facilitative attentional sets are accompanied by the top-down inhibition of irrelevant items.     

Flexibility of attention between stimulus dimensions

Three experiments examined the flexibility of attention to the color and location dimensions of visual stimuli. Displays typically consisted of two curved lines, one a target and the other a distractor. Subjects were precued to the location of the target, and they made a speeded response to that item’s direction of curvature. In Experiment 1, a color difference between the stimuli facilitated selective attention to targets. Experiment 2 demonstrated that this effect was not automatic. Although component color differences were necessary for selective attention, they were not sufficient unless they reliably specified the target. Furthermore, when color was informative but the target was in an unexpected color, performance was markedly impaired. A third experiment, using a response-deadline technique, showed that stimulus color was resolved before stimulus location and that attention can be exclusive to the color dimension. The results were interpreted in terms of a model assuming that stimulus color and location are processed independently. Subjects attend to the dimension resolved most quickly which can reliably specify the target.     

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.     

Statistical regularities modulate attentional capture independent of search strategy

An earlier study using the additional singleton task showed that statistical regularities regarding the distractor location can cause an attentional bias that affects the amount of attentional capture by distractors and the efficiency of selection of targets. The distractor singleton was systematically present more often in one location than in all other locations. The present study investigated whether this bias also occurs when observers adopt a feature search mode, i.e., when they search for a specific feature (circle) between elements with different shapes, while ignoring a colored distractor singleton. It is assumed that in feature search, observers can ignore distractors in a top-down way and as such one expects that statistical regularities about the distractor location should not play a role. Contrary to this prediction, we found that even in feature search, both attentional capture by the distractors and the efficiency of selecting the target were impacted by these statistical regularities. Moreover, statistical regularities regarding the feature value of the distractor (its color) had no effect on the amount of capture or the efficiency of selection. We claim that statistical regularities cause passive lingering biases of attention such that on the priority map, the location containing a high probability distractor competes less for attention than locations that are less likely to contain distractors.     

Target uncertainty does not lead to more distraction by singletons: intertrial priming does

In two experiments, we examined why a singleton distractor has a stronger interfering effect in visual search when the target identity is uncertain. When participants searched for a shape, a color singleton distractor had a larger slowing effect in a mixed block, in which the target shape could change from trial to trial, than in a pure block, in which the target shape remained the same. Importantly, this increased singleton distractor effect could be traced back entirely to intertrial priming, since the increased costs occurred only on trials in which the target and the singleton distractor swapped identity (Experiment 1, allowing for priming between targets and singleton distractors) or on trials in which the target alone changed identity while the singleton distractor remained constant (Experiment 2, allowing for priming between targets only). This suggests that target uncertainty itself does not lead to strategic changes in the attentional selection of singletons. Instead, selection is affected by relatively automatic priming mechanisms that may be enhanced by competition for attention.     

Retinal location and its effect on the processing of target and distractor information

Two experiments were conducted to study the perceptual facilitation and inhibition that occurs between foveal and parafoveal or peripheral regions of the eye. Experiment 1 used a Stroop task to compare color detection latencies of foveal and parafoveal targets. The target and distractor components of the Stroop stimuli were separated and presented with varied stimulus onset asynchronies. Experiment 2 used a Stroop-like task to replicate and extend the findings into the visual periphery. Subjects were found to process foveally presented distractor information while attending to targets presented in parafoveal or peripheral regions of the eye. Distractor information that was incompatible was suppressed while compatible information was used to facilitate target processing. When the targets were presented foveally along with the distractor information, subjects appeared to automatically process the distractor information. The findings are discussed within the framework of past studies that presented subjects with competing tasks across retinal location. The implications of these findings to a two-process theory of attention are also considered.     

Cueing the location of a distractor: an inhibitory mechanism of spatial attention?

Presenting an irrelevant distractor increases reaction times to a target. The current study shows that cueing the location of an upcoming 'distractor' can help to reduce the effects the distractor has on target processing. It is hypothesized that this reduction is due to the active inhibition of the cued location. In two experiments in which the location of the distractor was cued in advance, a reduced effect of the distractor on target-processing was observed. Analyses indicated that this effect was most likely caused by inhibition of the distractor location. The present findings suggest that inhibition plays an important role in visual-spatial selection processes and that this inhibitory mechanism can be controlled in a top-down fashion.     

Perceiving spatially inseparable objects: evidence for feature-based object selection not mediated by location

In 4 experiments, stimulus elements were arranged into an LED-like array, and letters were defined within the array by feature similarity between the elements with respect to color and form. These stimuli allowed the display of a target and a distractor letter simultaneously at the same location. They were spatially inseparable but could be separated in feature space. Participants had to identify the letter on a prespecified feature dimension (color or form). As a result, the distractors produced specific compatibility effects. This showed that nontarget features could not be ignored at an early stage (i.e., that color and form were processed automatically and in parallel up to a high stage). The target was selected from the resulting objects according to the prespecified feature dimension. Results demonstrate that object selection is possible without selecting absolute spatial arrays.     

Conflict-induced perceptual filtering

In a variety of conflict paradigms, target and distractor stimuli are defined in terms of perceptual features. Interference evoked by distractor stimuli tends to be reduced when the ratio of congruent to incongruent trials is decreased, suggesting conflict-induced perceptual filtering (i.e., adjusting the processing weights assigned to stimuli associated with the target and with the distractor features). In search of evidence for such a mechanism, we administered a flanker task, in which targets and distractors were defined in terms of stimulus location (Experiment 1) or color (Experiment 2). The efficiency of processing stimuli associated with target and distractor features was assessed in intermixed trials of a visual search task, in which a target had to be detected irrespective of these features. In both experiments search times were shorter for stimuli associated with the target feature than with the distractor feature of the flanker task. This effect was increased under conditions of a reduced congruent/incongruent ratio, thereby providing evidence for conflict-dependent perceptual filtering.     

Does selecting one visual object from several require inhibition of the actions associated with nonselected objects?

Four experiments are described in which 1 visual object (the target) was selected from another (the distractor) according to its color (Experiments 1, 2, and 4) or its relative location (Experiment 3) and then was classified according to a simple geometric property. Object classification was signaled as fast as possible by a precision or power grip response, and this grip was either compatible or incompatible with either object. When targets were selected by color, target-compatible grip responses were facilitated, but distractor-compatible grip responses were impaired. When targets were selected by location, similar results were obtained for target-compatible grip responses, but not distractor-compatible grip responses. These data are explained in terms of the involvement of action codes in object-level selection.     

Facilitation versus inhibition in non-spatial attribute discrimination tasks

Inhibition of Return is a delay in initiating attentional shifts to previously inspected locations. It has been explained as a mechanism to facilitate visual search of a scene by inhibiting the allocation of attention to locations that have already been examined. We (Hu, Samuel, &; Chan, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2010) recently demonstrated that similar processing costs can appear when a non-spatial attribute (color or shape) repeats—detection of a target stimulus was slower if the target shared color or shape with a recently presented cue. In the current study, we test whether such inhibitory effects occur for non-spatial attribute repetition when observers must make a discrimination judgment about targets. We found two independent effects: First, there was a standard location-based IOR effect—target discrimination was slower when the target appeared in the same location as a preceding cue. Second, reaction times were faster if the target's color or shape matched the cue's color or shape; this facilitation effect contrasts with both the location-based inhibition that was present in the current experiments, and with the inhibitory effect of feature repetition in our previous detection task study. The data are best accounted for by a three-factor model recently suggested by Lupiáñez (Attention and time, 2010).     

Top-down and bottom-up attentional control: On the nature of interference from a salient distractor

In two experiments using spatial probes, we measured the temporal and spatial interactions between top-down control of attention and bottom-up interference from a salient distractor in visual search. The subjects searched for a square among circles, ignoring color. Probe response times showed that a color singleton distractor could draw attention to its location in the early stage of visual processing (before a 100-msec stimulus onset asynchrony [SOA]), but only when the color singleton distractor was located far from the target. Apparently the bottom-up activation of the singleton distractor’s location is affected early on by local interactions with nearby stimulus locations. Moreover, probe results showed that a singleton distractor did not receive attention after extended practice. These results suggest that top-down control of attention is possible at an early stage of visual processing. In the long-SOA condition (150-msec SOA), spatial attention selected the target location over distractor locations, and this tendency occurred with or without extended practice.