Role of working memory load on selective attention to affectively valent information

Empirical evidence obtained with neutral stimuli has shown that selective attention relies on working memory functions as distractor processing occurs under conditions of high but not of low working memory load. We investigated whether these findings also hold for affectively valent distractors. In three experiments, participants completed the original Flanker task with famous people (Exps 1 and 2) and an affective Flanker task (Exp. 3) in which positive and negative words were presented superimposed onto happy, angry, and neutral faces under conditions of high or low working memory load. In line with past findings, results showed greater interference effects due to processing of distractors showing known people under high working memory load. In contrast interference effects due to processing of valent distractors occurred regardless of working memory load. The present findings are in contrast with those reported with neutral stimuli as they indicate that automatic evaluation of incoming affectively valent information occurs regardless of task priorities and of working memory load.     

High working memory load leads to more Ebbinghaus illusion

The evidence that distractor processing increases with greater load on working memory has come mainly from Stroop-type interference tasks, making it difficult to establish whether cognitive load affects distractor processing at the perceptual level or during response selection. We measured the Ebbinghaus illusion under varying levels of working memory load to test whether cognitive control is also relevant for preventing processing of distractors that do not produce any response conflict, and instead affect target processing at the perceptual level. The Ebbinghaus illusion was greater under high working memory load, suggesting that availability of cognitive control functions is critical to reduce distractor processing even for distractors that are not associated with a response. We conclude that the effect of loading working memory during selective attention leads to greater distractor perception.     

The role of working memory in auditory selective attention

A growing body of research now demonstrates that working memory plays an important role in controlling the extent to which irrelevant visual distractors are processed during visual selective attention tasks (e.g., Lavie, Hirst, De Fockert, & Viding, 2004). Recently, it has been shown that the successful selection of tactile information also depends on the availability of working memory (Dalton, Lavie, & Spence, 2009). Here, we investigate whether working memory plays a role in auditory selective attention. Participants focused their attention on short continuous bursts of white noise (targets) while attempting to ignore pulsed bursts of noise (distractors). Distractor interference in this auditory task, as measured in terms of the difference in performance between congruent and incongruent distractor trials, increased significantly under high (vs. low) load in a concurrent working-memory task. These results provide the first evidence demonstrating a causal role for working memory in reducing interference by irrelevant auditory distractors.     

The role of working memory in tactile selective attention

Load theory suggests that working memory controls the extent to which irrelevant distractors are processed (e.g., Lavie, Hirst, De Fockert, & Viding, 2004). However, so far this proposal has only been tested in vision. Here, we examine the extent to which tactile selective attention also depends on working memory. In Experiment 1, participants focused their attention on continuous target vibrations while attempting to ignore pulsed distractor vibrations. In Experiment 2, targets were always presented to a particular hand, with distractors being presented to the other hand. In both experiments, a high (vs. low) load in a concurrent working memory task led to greater interference by the tactile distractors. These results establish the role of working memory in the control of tactile selective attention, demonstrating for the first time that the principles of load theory also apply to the tactile modality.     

Attentional distractor interference may be diminished by concurrent working memory load in normal participants and traumatic brain injury patients

A reduction in congruency effects under working memory (WM) load has been previously described using different attentional paradigms (e.g.,  and ). One hypothesis is that different types of WM load have different effects on attentional selection, depending on whether a specific memory load demands resources in common with target or distractor processing. In particular, if information in WM is related to the distractors in the selective attention task, there is a reduction in distraction (Kim et al., 2005). However, although previous results seem to point to a decrease in interference under high WM load conditions (Kim et al., 2005), the lack of a neutral baseline for the congruency effects makes it difficult to differentiate between a decrease in interference or in facilitation. In the present work we included neutral trials in the task introduced by Kim et al. (2005) and tested normal participants and traumatic brain injury patients. Results support a reduction in the processing of distractors under WM load, at least for incongruent trials in both groups. Theoretical as well as applied implications are discussed.     

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.     

Load theory of selective attention and cognitive control

A load theory of attention in which distractor rejection depends on the level and type of load involved in current processing was tested. A series of experiments demonstrates that whereas high perceptual load reduces distractor interference, working memory load or dual-task coordination load increases distractor interference. These findings suggest 2 selective attention mechanisms: a perceptual selection mechanism serving to reduce distractor perception in situations of high perceptual load that exhaust perceptual capacity in processing relevant stimuli and a cognitive control mechanism that reduces interference from perceived distractors as long as cognitive control functions are available to maintain current priorities (low cognitive load). This theory resolves the long-standing early versus late selection debate and clarifies the role of cognitive control in selective attention.     

Attentional distractor interference may be diminished by concurrent working memory load in normal participants and traumatic brain injury patients

A reduction in congruency effects under working memory (WM) load has been previously described using different attentional paradigms (e.g., Kim et al., 2005, Smilek et al., 2006). One hypothesis is that different types of WM load have different effects on attentional selection, depending on whether a specific memory load demands resources in common with target or distractor processing. In particular, if information in WM is related to the distractors in the selective attention task, there is a reduction in distraction (Kim et al., 2005). However, although previous results seem to point to a decrease in interference under high WM load conditions (Kim et al., 2005), the lack of a neutral baseline for the congruency effects makes it difficult to differentiate between a decrease in interference or in facilitation. In the present work we included neutral trials in the task introduced by Kim et al. (2005) and tested normal participants and traumatic brain injury patients. Results support a reduction in the processing of distractors under WM load, at least for incongruent trials in both groups. Theoretical as well as applied implications are discussed.     

The role of working memory in attentional capture

Much previous research has demonstrated that visual search is typically disrupted by the presence of a unique “singleton” distractor in the search display. Here we show that attentional capture by an irrelevant color singleton during shape search critically depends on availability of working memory to the search task: When working memory is loaded in a concurrent yet unrelated verbal short-term memory task, capture increases. These findings converge with previous demonstrations that increasing working memory load results in greater distractor interference in Stroop-like tasks (de Fockert, Rees, Frith, & Lavie, 2001; Lavie, Hirst, de Fockert, & Viding, 2004), which support the hypothesis that working memory provides goal-directed control of visual selective attention allowing to minimize interference by goal-irrelevant distractors.     

Working memory load can both improve and impair selective attention: Evidence from the Navon paradigm

Selective attention to relevant targets has been shown to depend on the availability of working memory (WM). Under conditions of high WM load, processing of irrelevant distractors is enhanced. Here we showed that this detrimental effect of WM load on selective attention efficiency is reversed when the task requires global- rather than local-level processing. Participants were asked to attend to either the local or the global level of a hierarchical Navon stimulus while keeping either a low or a high load in WM. In line with previous findings, during attention to the local level, distractors at the global level produced more interference under high than under low WM load. By contrast, loading WM had the opposite effect of improving selective attention during attention to the global level. The findings demonstrate that the impact of WM load on selective attention is not invariant, but rather is dependent on the level of the to-be-attended information.     

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.     

Processing overlap-dependent distractor dilution rather than perceptual target load determines attentional selectivity

The perceptual load theory of attentional selection argues that the degree to which distractors interfere with target processing is determined by the “perceptual load” (or discrimination difficulty) of target processing: when perceptual load is low, distractors interfere to a greater extent than when it is high. A well-known exception is load-independent interference effects from face distractors during processing of name targets. This finding was reconciled with load theory by proposing distinct processing resources for faces versus names. In the present study, we revisit this effect to test (a) whether increasing the processing overlap (perceptual, lexical, conceptual) between potential targets and distractors would reinstate the classic load effect, and (b) whether this data pattern could be better explained by load theory or by a rival account that argues that distractor dilution rather than target load determines the degree of distractor interference. Over four experiments, we first replicate the original finding and then show that load effects grow with increasing processing overlap between potential targets and distractors. However, by adding dilution conditions, we also show that these processing overlap dependent modulations of distractor interference can be explained by the distractor dilution perspective but not by perceptual load theory. Thus, our findings support a processing overlap dilution account of attentional selection.     

视觉工作记忆负载类型对注意选择的影响

通过操纵Flanker任务相对于视觉工作记忆任务的呈现位置, 探讨在视觉工作记忆编码和保持阶段, 精度负载和容量负载对注意选择的影响。行为结果发现, Flanker任务呈现位置和视觉工作记忆负载类型影响注意选择; ERP结果发现, 在保持阶段, 当搜索目标和干扰项不一致时, 负载类型影响N2成分。研究表明, 在编码阶段, 视觉工作记忆负载主要通过占用更多知觉资源降低干扰效应, 支持知觉负载理论; 而在保持阶段, 当Flanker任务位于记忆项内部时, 两类负载在工作记忆表征过程中不同的神经活动导致投入到注意选择的认知控制资源不同, 可能是两类负载影响保持阶段注意选择的机制。     

工作记忆负载对位置干扰子激活加工和抑制加工的影响

针对工作记忆（WM）负载对干扰子加工的影响存在认知控制机制和负载特异机制两种分歧观点的争议及Park等人的负载特异机制研究中存在的不足,文章尝试采用干扰效应和负启动效应双指标考察了三种不同类型的WM负载对位置干扰子加工的影响。结果表明,WM负载对位置干扰子加工的影响存在双重作用机制（认知控制机制和负载特异机制）;目标刺激与干扰子刺激的属性一致时,亦可得出负载特异机制观点,且可将WM任务与选择性注意任务之间竞争的资源锁定为知觉处理资源;导致上述两种观点争议的原因是以往研究未将干扰子加工过程分离为激活加工阶段和抑制加工阶段来考察;用双指标分离干扰子加工阶段的研究思路和方法不但可解决这两种观点的争议且可为两者的统合奠定基础。     

Strategic and automatic effects of visual working memory on attention in visual search

Previous research indicates that visual attention can be automatically captured by sensory inputs that match the contents of visual working memory. However, Woodman and Luck (2007) showed that information in working memory can be used flexibly as a template for either selection or rejection according to task demands. We report two experiments that extend their work. Participants performed a visual search task while maintaining items in visual working memory. Memory items were presented for either a short or long exposure duration immediately prior to the search task. Memory was tested by a change-detection task immediately afterwards. On a random half of trials items in memory matched either one distractor in the search task (Experiment 1) or three (Experiment 2). The main result was that matching distractors speeded or slowed target detection depending on whether memory items were presented for a long or short duration. These effects were more in evidence with three matching distractors than one. We conclude that the influence of visual working memory on visual search is indeed flexible but is not solely a function of task demands. Our results suggest that attentional capture by perceptual inputs matching information in visual working memory involves a fast automatic process that can be overridden by a slower top-down process of attentional avoidance.     

Distractor devaluation requires visual working memory

Visual stimuli seen previously as distractors in a visual search task are subsequently evaluated more negatively than those seen as targets. An attentional inhibition account for this distractor-devaluation effect posits that associative links between attentional inhibition and to-be-ignored stimuli are established during search, stored, and then later reinstantiated, implying that distractor devaluation may require visual working memory (WM) resources. To assess this, we measured distractor devaluation with and without a concurrent visual WM load. Participants viewed a memory array, performed a simple search task, evaluated one of the search items (or a novel item), and then viewed a memory test array. Although distractor devaluation was observed with low (and no) WM load, it was absent when WM load was increased. This result supports the notions that active association of current attentional states with stimuli requires WM and that memory for these associations plays a role in affective response.     

Object-based attention overrides perceptual load to modulate visual distraction

The ability to ignore task-irrelevant information and overcome distraction is central to our ability to efficiently carry out a number of tasks. One factor shown to strongly influence distraction is the perceptual load of the task being performed; as the perceptual load of task-relevant information processing increases, the likelihood that task-irrelevant information will be processed and interfere with task performance decreases. However, it has also been demonstrated that other attentional factors play an important role in whether or not distracting information affects performance. Specifically, object-based attention can modulate the extent of distractor processing, leaving open the possibility that object-based attention mechanisms may directly modulate the way in which perceptual load affects distractor processing. Here, we show that object-based attention dominates perceptual load to determine the extent of task-irrelevant information processing, with distractors affecting performance only when they are contained within the same object as the task-relevant search display. These results suggest that object-based attention effects play a central role in selective attention regardless of the perceptual load of the task being performed.     

知觉表征精度对工作记忆中抑制干扰能力的影响

工作记忆的容量十分有限,需要选择性地抑制与目标无关信息的干扰,工作记忆容量高的个体,其抑制干扰的能力也更强。本研究采用带有不同形状干扰刺激的色块颜色回忆任务考察干扰对工作记忆容量和表征精度的影响,结果发现,当负荷超出工作记忆容量范围时,干扰减少了记忆所能表征客体的个数;当负荷在工作记忆容量范围内时,干扰降低了记忆中表征客体的精度。更进一步,研究采用独立的知觉任务来测量知觉表征的精度,并探讨作为信息加工的初始阶段的知觉表征如何影响工作记忆加工过程中抑制干扰的能力。将实验中收集的48名有效被试按照知觉表征精度的高低平均分为两组,结果发现上述干扰效应主要表现在知觉表征精度较低的组中,并且该组中知觉表征精度越高的个体,其工作记忆抑制干扰的能力也越强。本研究为实践中通过知觉训练来提升工作记忆的抑制干扰能力提供了理论指导。     

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.     

Selective impairment of auditory selective attention under concurrent cognitive load

Load theory predicts that concurrent cognitive load impairs selective attention. For visual stimuli, it has been shown that this impairment can be selective: Distraction was specifically increased when the stimulus material used in the cognitive load task matches that of the selective attention task. Here, we report four experiments that demonstrate such selective load effects for auditory selective attention. The effect of two different cognitive load tasks on two different auditory Stroop tasks was examined, and selective load effects were observed: Interference in a nonverbal-auditory Stroop task was increased under concurrent nonverbal-auditory cognitive load (compared with a no-load condition), but not under concurrent verbal-auditory cognitive load. By contrast, interference in a verbal-auditory Stroop task was increased under concurrent verbal-auditory cognitive load but not under nonverbal-auditory cognitive load. This double-dissociation pattern suggests the existence of different and separable verbal and nonverbal processing resources in the auditory domain.