The role of perceptual load in processing distractor faces

It has been established that successful ignoring of irrelevant distractors depends on the extent to which the current task loads attention. However, the previous load studies have typically employed neutral distractor stimuli (e.g., letters). In the experiments reported here, we examined whether the perception of irrelevant distractor faces would show the same effects. We manipulated attentional load in a relevant task of name search by varying the search set size and found that whereas congruency effects from meaningful nonface distractors were eliminated by higher search load, interference from distractor faces was entirely unaffected by search load. These results support the idea that face processing may be mandatory and generalize the load theory to the processing of meaningful and more complex nonface distractors.     

Dilution, not load, affects distractor processing

Lavie and Tsal (1994) proposed that spare attentional capacity is allocated involuntarily to the processing of irrelevant stimuli, thereby enabling interference. Under this view, when task demands increase, spare capacity should decrease and distractor interference should decrease. In support, Lavie and Cox (1997) found that increasing perceptual load by increasing search set size decreased interference from an irrelevant distractor. In three experiments, we manipulated the cue set size (number of cued locations) independently of the display set size (number of letters presented). Increasing the display set size reduced distractor interference regardless of whether the additional letters were relevant to the task. In contrast, increasing the cue set size increased distractor interference. Both findings are inconsistent with the load explanation, but are consistent with a proposed two-stage dilution account.     

Attentional repulsion effect despite a colour-based control set

A salient distractor can have a twofold effect on concurrent visual processes; it can both reduce the processing efficiency of the relevant target (e.g., increasing response time) and distort the spatial representation of the display (e.g., misperception of a target location). Previous work has shown that knowledge of the key feature of visual targets can eliminate the effect of salient distractors on processing efficiency. For instance, knowing that the target of interest is red (i.e., having an attentional control set for red) can eliminate the cost of green distractors on the speed of response to the target. The present study shows that the second mark of irrelevant salient distractors, i.e., distortions in spatial representation, is resistant to such top-down control. Using the attentional repulsion effect, we examined the influence of salient distractors on target localization. Observers had a colour-based control set and the distractors either matched or mismatched with the control set. In the first two experiments, we found systematic mislocalization of targets away from the peripheral distractors (i.e., an attentional repulsion effect). Critically, the effect was caused by distractors that both matched and mismatched the control set. A third experiment, using the same stimuli, found that processing efficiency was perfectly resistant to distractors that did not match the control set, consistent with previous work. Together, the present findings suggest that although top-down control can eliminate the cost of a salient distractor on processing efficiency, it does so without eliminating the distractor's influence on the spatial representation of the display.     

Practice in visual search produces decreased capacity demands but increased distraction

Lavie (1995) proposed a load account of selective attention, which holds that spare capacity is involuntarily allocated to the processing of irrelevant stimuli. In support of this account, Lavie and Cox (1997) combined a letter search task with a flanker task and found that increasing load (search set size) resulted in decreased interference from an irrelevant distractor letter. In three experiments using a very similar procedure, we varied distractor location and distractor distinctiveness and observed that as load increased (from set size 2 to set size 6), there was a consistent reduction in interference. Critically, we addressed a fundamental hypothesis derived from the load account-that practice reduces capacity demands. This hypothesis leads to the rather counterintuitive prediction that as performance improves with practice, distractor processing should actually increase. Indeed, we found that interference in a high-load condition (set size 6), but not in a low-load condition (set size 2), did increase with practice. We describe a two-stage dilution account of attention that accommodates these results.     

Prime-trial processing demands and their impact on distractor processing in a spatial negative priming task

A spatial negative priming (NP) paradigm was used where trials were presented in pairs, first the 'prime' and then the 'probe', and where participants responded manually to a target's location. In Experiment 1, three prime-trial types were used: distractor-plus-target, predictable distractor-only, and unpredictable distractor-only, with prime-probe trial onset delays of 2, 5 or 10 s (NP longevity). In Experiment 2, the latter two prime-trials were employed with onset delays of 75 and 750 ms (distractor response activation-inhibition sequence). With the exception of the 10 s onset delay, the spatial NP effect data (NP size, longevity, distractor response activation-inhibition sequence) was the same for all three prime-trial types. Thus, the varying processing demands associated with each of the prime-trial types (e.g., selection, intervening response) did not alter prime distractor processing so that they differentially contributed to the spatial NP process. The three prime-trial types can be used interchangeably, within limits, to study the NP process.     

Failures to ignore entirely irrelevant distractors: the role of load

In daily life (e.g., in the work environment) people are often distracted by stimuli that are clearly irrelevant to the current task and should be ignored. In contrast, much applied distraction research has focused on task interruptions by information that requires a response and therefore cannot be ignored. Moreover, the most commonly used laboratory measures of distractibility (e.g., in the response-competition and attentional-capture paradigms), typically involve distractors that are task relevant (e.g., through response associations or location). A series of experiments assessed interference effects from stimuli that are entirely unrelated to the current task, comparing the effects of perceptual load on task-irrelevant and task-relevant (response competing) distractors. The results showed that an entirely irrelevant distractor can interfere with task performance to the same extent as a response-competing distractor and that, as with other types of distractors, the interfering effects of the irrelevant distractors can be eliminated with high perceptual load in the relevant task. These findings establish a new laboratory measure of a form of distractibility common to everyday life and highlight load as an important determinant of such distractibility.     

Dilution: atheoretical burden or just load? A reply to Tsal and Benoni (2010)

Load theory of attention proposes that distractor processing is reduced in tasks with high perceptual load that exhaust attentional capacity within task-relevant processing. In contrast, tasks of low perceptual load leave spare capacity that spills over, resulting in the perception of task-irrelevant, potentially distracting stimuli. Tsal and Benoni (2010) find that distractor response competition effects can be reduced under conditions with a high search set size but low perceptual load (due to a singleton color target). They claim that the usual effect of search set size on distractor processing is not due to attentional load but instead attribute this to lower level visual interference. Here, we propose an account for their findings within load theory. We argue that in tasks of low perceptual load but high set size, an irrelevant distractor competes with the search nontargets for remaining capacity. Thus, distractor processing is reduced under conditions in which the search nontargets receive the spillover of capacity instead of the irrelevant distractor. We report a new experiment testing this prediction. Our new results demonstrate that, when peripheral distractor processing is reduced, it is the search nontargets nearest to the target that are perceived instead. Our findings provide new evidence for the spare capacity spillover hypothesis made by load theory and rule out accounts in terms of lower level visual interference (or mere "dilution") for cases of reduced distractor processing under low load in displays of high set size. We also discuss additional evidence that discounts the viability of Tsal and Benoni's dilution account as an alternative to perceptual load.     

Perceptual load effects on processing distractor faces indicate face-specific capacity limits

The claim that face perception is mediated by a specialized “face module” that proceeds automatically, independently of attention (e.g., Kanwisher, 2000) can be reconciled with load theory claims that visual perception has limited capacity (e.g., Lavie, 1995) by hypothesizing that face perception has face-specific capacity limits. We tested this hypothesis by comparing the effects of face and nonface perceptual load on distractor face processing. Participants searched a central array of either faces or letter strings for a pop star versus politician's face or name and made speeded classification responses. Perceptual load was varied through the relevant search set size. Response competition effects from a category-congruent or -incongruent peripheral distractor face were eliminated with more than two faces in the face search task, but were unaffected by perceptual load in the name search task. These results support the hypothesis that face perception has face-specific capacity limits and resolve apparent discrepancies in previous research.     

Set-specific capture can be reduced by preemptively occupying a limited-capacity focus of attention

Recent work has shown that contingent attentional capture effects can be especially large when multiple attentional sets for color guide visual search (Moore & Weissman, 2010). In particular, this research suggests that detecting a target-colored (e.g., orange) distractor leads the corresponding attentional set (e.g., identify orange letters) to enter a limited-capacity focus of attention in working memory, where it remains briefly while the distractor is being attended. Consequently, the ability to identify a differently-colored (e.g., green) target 100-300 ms later is impaired because the appropriate set (e.g., identify green letters) cannot also enter the focus of attention. In two experiments, we investigated whether such set-specific capture can be reduced by preemptively occupying the focus of attention. As predicted, a target-colored central distractor presented 233 ms before a target-colored peripheral distractor eliminated set-specific capture arising from the peripheral distractor. Moreover, this effect was observed only when the central distractor's color (e.g., orange) (a) matched a different set than the upcoming peripheral distractor's color (e.g., green) and (b) matched the same set as the upcoming central target's color (e.g., orange). We conclude that the same working memory limitations that give rise to set-specific capture can be preemptively exploited to reduce it.     

Sequential analysis of the numerical Stroop effect reveals response suppression

Automatic processing of irrelevant stimulus dimensions has been demonstrated in a variety of tasks. Previous studies have shown that conflict between relevant and irrelevant dimensions can be reduced when a feature of the irrelevant dimension is repeated. The specific level at which the automatic process is suppressed (e.g., perceptual repetition, response repetition), however, is less understood. In the current experiment we used the numerical Stroop paradigm, in which the processing of irrelevant numerical values of 2 digits interferes with the processing of their physical size, to pinpoint the precise level of the suppression. Using a sequential analysis, we dissociated perceptual repetition from response repetition of the relevant and irrelevant dimension. Our analyses of reaction times, error rates, and diffusion modeling revealed that the congruity effect is significantly reduced or even absent when the response sequence of the irrelevant dimension, rather than the numerical value or the physical size, is repeated. These results suggest that automatic activation of the irrelevant dimension is suppressed at the response level. The current results shed light on the level of interaction between numerical magnitude and physical size as well as the effect of variability of responses and stimuli on automatic processing.     

Spatial negative priming in bilingualism

Balanced bilinguals have been shown to have an enhanced ability to inhibit distracting information. In this study, we investigated the hypothesis that the bilinguals’ efficiency in inhibitory control can be advantageous in some conditions, but disadvantageous in others—for example, negative priming conditions, in which previously irrelevant information becomes relevant. Data collected in a target-stimulus locating task from 29 early bilingual adults and 29 age-matched monolinguals showed that the bilinguals’ greater inhibition of irrelevant spatial information (i.e., the position of a distractor stimulus) resulted in a smaller effect of the distractor presence (i.e., a smaller difference in error rates in trials with and without distractors) and a larger negative priming effect (i.e., a larger difference between the error rates shown in trials wherein the target position corresponded to the position of the previous-trial distractor and trials wherein the target was presented in a previously vacant position). These findings support the hypothesis of specific nonlinguistic cognitive effects of bilingualism on inhibitory control functions, which are not necessarily reflected in cognitive advantages.     

Is three greater than five: The relation between physical and semantic size in comparison tasks

In this study, subjects were asked to judge which of two digits (e.g., 3 5) was larger either in physical or in numerical size. Reaction times were facilitated when the irrelevant dimension was congruent with the relevant dimension and were inhibited when the two were incongruent (size congruity effect). Although judgments based on physical size were faster, their speed was affected by the numerical distance between the members of the digit pair, indicating that numerical distance is automatically computed even when it is irrelevant to the comparative judgment being required by the task. This finding argues for parallel processing of physical and semantic information in this task.     

Lightening the load: perceptual load impairs visual detection in typical adults but not in autism

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) research portrays a mixed picture of attentional abilities with demonstrations of enhancements (e.g., superior visual search) and deficits (e.g., higher distractibility). Here we test a potential resolution derived from the Load Theory of Attention (e.g., Lavie, 2005). In Load Theory, distractor processing depends on the perceptual load of the task and as such can only be eliminated under high load that engages full capacity. We hypothesize that ASD involves enhanced perceptual capacity, leading to the superior performance and increased distractor processing previously reported. Using a signal-detection paradigm, we test this directly and demonstrate that, under higher levels of load, perceptual sensitivity was reduced in typical adults but not in adults with ASD. These findings confirm our hypothesis and offer a promising solution to the previous discrepancies by suggesting that increased distractor processing in ASD results not from a filtering deficit but from enhanced perceptual capacity.     

The locus of location repetition latency effects.

We examined the processing locus (location vs. response) of location repetition effects in terms of the event [target (t) or distractor (d)] that initially occupied and then re-occupied the repeated location (i.e., t-to-t, t-to-d, d-to-t, d-to-d). Trials were presented in pairs (prime, then probe) and 2:1 location-to-response mappings were used. Generally, for all repetition conditions, perceptual processing at the repeated location itself was facilitated (location locus), while re-activated responses delayed output production (response locus). More specifically, perceptual facilitation observed for a repeated location was independent of the kind of processing (i.e., t or d) that occurred earlier, suggesting that it is not the labeling of locations as relevant or irrelevant that determines location repetition effects. Response production was significantly slowed only when a just-inhibited response had then to be executed, which supported the view that the spatial negative priming effect has a response locus.     

Working memory load and distraction: dissociable effects of visual maintenance and cognitive control

We establish a new dissociation between the roles of working memory (WM) cognitive control and visual maintenance in selective attention as measured by the efficiency of distractor rejection. The extent to which focused selective attention can prevent distraction has been shown to critically depend on the level and type of load involved in the task. High perceptual load that consumes perceptual capacity leads to reduced distractor processing, whereas high WM load that reduces WM ability to exert priority-based executive cognitive control over the task results in increased distractor processing (e.g., Lavie, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(2), 75–82, 2005). WM also serves to maintain task-relevant visual representations, and such visual maintenance is known to recruit the same sensory cortices as those involved in perception (e.g., Pasternak & Greenlee, Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 6(2), 97–107, 2005). These findings led us to hypothesize that loading WM with visual maintenance would reduce visual capacity involved in perception, thus resulting in reduced distractor processing—similar to perceptual load and opposite to WM cognitive control load. Distractor processing was assessed in a response competition task, presented during the memory interval (or during encoding; Experiment 1a) of a WM task. Loading visual maintenance or encoding by increased set size for a memory sample of shapes, colors, and locations led to reduced distractor response competition effects. In contrast, loading WM cognitive control with verbal rehearsal of a random letter set led to increased distractor effects. These findings confirm load theory predictions and provide a novel functional distinction between the roles of WM maintenance and cognitive control in selective attention.     

Attentional focus, processing load, and Stroop interference

Although the effects of attentional focus and perceptual load on selective attention when targets and distractors are distinct objects that occupy separate locations are well known, there has been little examination of their role when both relevant and irrelevant information pertains to the same object. In four experiments, participants were shown Stroop color words or strings of letters in a task of speeded color identification. When the participants' attentional focus was manipulated via cue validity or precue size, greater Stroop interference was observed when the attentional focus was narrow than when it was broad. However, when the participants were induced to adopt a comparable attentional focus in a dual-task paradigm, the differential Stroop interference was eliminated. Furthermore, contrary to the prediction of the perceptual load hypothesis, different levels of processing load did not lead to differential Stroop interference. These results emphasize the importance of stimulus structure in understanding distractor processing. They indicate that when relevant and irrelevant information pertains to the same object, narrowing attentional focus increases distractor processing, and perceptual load has a negligible effect on the extent of distractor processing.     

How to keep attention from straying: Get engaged!

Previous research has suggested that the involuntary allocation of spatial attention to salient, irrelevant stimuli (i.e., attentional capture) is prevented when attention is in a focused state (e.g., Yantis & Jonides, 1990). Recent work has suggested that although focused attention may be necessary to prevent attentional capture by irrelevant stimuli, it is not sufficient (e.g., Folk, Leber, & Egeth, 2002). The present experiments provide evidence that attentional engagement, rather than attentional focusing, prevents capture. Observers performed a rapid serial visual presentation task in which they were asked to identify a target letter defined by color. Peripheral distractors that shared the color of the target produced evidence of attentional capture. This effect was completely eliminated, however, when the peripheral distractor was preceded by a central distractor designed to engage attention on the stream. It is concluded that attentional engagement serves to lock out capture by irrelevant, salient stimuli.     

Abrupt onsets capture attention independent of top-down control settings

Previous research using a spatial cuing paradigm in which a distractor cue preceded the target has shown that new objects presented with abrupt onsets only capture attention when observers are set to look for them (e.g., Folk, Remington, & Johnston, 1992). In the present study, we used the same spatial cuing paradigm as Folk et al. (1992) to demonstrate that even when observers have an attentional set for a color singleton or a specific color feature, an irrelevant new object presented with an abrupt onset interfered with search. We also show that the identity of the abrupt-onset distractor affects responses to the target, indicating that at some point spatial attention was allocated to the abrupt onset. We conclude that abrupt onsets ornew objects override a top-down set for color. Abrupt onsets or new objects appear to capture attention independently of top-down control settings.     

The locus and modulation of the location negative priming effect

Responding to the location of a target is slower when it appears at a recent distractor location [ignored-repetition (IR) trial] than when it arises at a new position [control (CO) trial], defining the location negative priming (NP) effect. On IR trials, both the distractor location and response are from the prior trial, and the locus question asks whether the delayed responding that arises is caused by the reused distractor position (i.e., a location locus) or the need to execute a distractor output (i.e., a response locus). A location NP procedure was used, incorporating a many:1 location-to-response mapping design, along with a response cue on some trials. A response locus for the location NP effect was indicated. Distractor-turned-target responses took longer to initiate than new outputs (many:1 paradigm), and valid response cues reduced distractor response interference and the location NP effect. Importantly, a possible S-R compatibility problem within the many:1 S-R paradigm was not supported.     

Auditory attentional capture: effects of singleton distractor sounds

The phenomenon of attentional capture by a unique yet irrelevant singleton distractor has typically been studied in visual search. In this article, the authors examine whether a similar phenomenon occurs in the auditory domain. Participants searched sequences of sounds for targets defined by frequency, intensity, or duration. The presence of a singleton distractor that was unique on an irrelevant dimension (e.g., a low-frequency singleton in search for a target of high intensity) was associated with search costs in both detection and discrimination tasks. However, if the singleton feature coincided with the target item, search was facilitated. These results establish the phenomenon of auditory attentional capture.