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.     

知觉负载对负性分心面孔的知觉加工和记忆的影响

本研究采用视觉搜索和意外再认记忆任务,结合事件相关电位技术,考察知觉负载对负性分心面孔的知觉加工和记忆的影响。在视觉搜索任务中,行为上恐惧分心面孔在高负载下干扰任务。ERP结果上,恐惧比中性分心面孔诱发更大的N170和N250;在低负载下恐惧比中性分心面孔诱发更大的N700,在高负载下没有差异。在意外再认记忆中,个体对低负载下的恐惧分心面孔表现出记忆。这些结果说明负性分心物在早期是自动化加工;晚期加工受知觉负载的调节,负载越低对负性分心物的过滤越少,存在对负性分心物的记忆偏向。     

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.     

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.     

Contrasting effects of sensory limits and capacity limits in visual selective attention

The effects of perceptual load and those of target-stimulus degradation on distractor processing were contrasted. Targets either had to be found among several nontargets (high perceptual load) or were presented alone and were intact (low perceptual load), had reduced size and contrast (Experiment 1), had reduced duration and were followed by a mask (Experiment 2), or had reduced visual acuity owing to position eccentricity (Experiment 3) in the degraded low-load condition. The results showed that both high perceptual load and target degradation increased general task difficulty, as is reflected by overall reaction times and accuracy. However, whereas high perceptual load reduced response-competition effects of irrelevant distractors, target degradation increased distractor effects. These results support the hypothesis that distractor processing depends on the extent to which high perceptual load exhausts attention in relevant processing and provide a dissociation between perceptual load and general task difficulty and processing speed.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Interference from familiar natural distractors is not eliminated by high perceptual load

A crucial prediction of perceptual load theory is that high perceptual load can eliminate interference from distractors. However, Lavie et al. (Psychol Sci 14:510–515, 2003) found that high perceptual load did not eliminate interference when the distractor was a face. The current experiments examined the interaction between familiarity and perceptual load in modulating interference in a name search task. The data reveal that high perceptual load eliminated the interference effect for unfamiliar distractors that were faces or objects, but did not eliminate the interference for familiar distractors that were faces or objects. Based on these results, we proposed that the processing of familiar and natural stimuli may be immune to the effect of perceptual load.     

Effects of mental fatigue on the capacity limits of visual attention

The literature indicates that mental fatigue, due to Time-on-Task (ToT), compromises the ability to ignore distractors. The present study elaborates on this effect by testing whether perceptual load of the target stimuli moderates the ability to ignore distractors under fatigue. Participants (N = 27) performed a visual attention task (an Eriksen flanker task) for 2.5 hours without rest. Target letters were presented at three different perceptual loads and with a peripheral distractor letter. Three target–distractor conditions were tested: congruent, incongruent, and neutral. Results showed that, overall, error rates and reaction times increased with ToT. The detrimental effect of fatigue on performance was most pronounced in the high perceptual load condition. Importantly, however, we also found that fatigue-related ignorance of distractors was compromised in the low perceptual load condition, but not in the medium or high perceptual load condition. This finding is in accordance with the perceptual load theory and refines the knowledge about the declining cognitive performance under fatigue.     

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.     

Perceptual load does not modulate auditory distractor processing

In vision, it is well established that the perceptual load of a relevant task determines the extent to which irrelevant distractors are processed. Much less research has addressed the effects of perceptual load within hearing. Here, we provide an extensive test using two different perceptual load manipulations, measuring distractor processing through response competition and awareness report. Across four experiments, we consistently failed to find support for the role of perceptual load in auditory selective attention. We therefore propose that the auditory system – although able to selectively focus processing on a relevant stream of sounds – is likely to have surplus capacity to process auditory information from other streams, regardless of the perceptual load in the attended stream. This accords well with the notion of the auditory modality acting as an ‘early-warning’ system as detection of changes in the auditory scene is crucial even when the perceptual demands of the relevant task are high.     

Asymmetrical perceptual load in lateralised word processing

We applied the Load Theory of attention (Lavie, 1995, 2005) to the case of distraction during processing of lateralised words presented in either the right or the left visual fields. Previous research (Brand-D'Abrescia & Lavie, 2007) showed that lexicality affects selective attention such that the number of letters in a search task only increases perceptual load and reduces irrelevant distractor effects for searches in nonwords but not in words. The present study examined the hypothesis that the effect of lexicality on distractor processing would be stronger for words presented to the left compared to the right hemisphere. The results supported this hypothesis and their implications for attention to words in the two cerebral hemispheres are discussed. We suggest that the efficiency of attentional selection differed because perceptual load in the visual fields taxed processing depending on hemispheric language expertise.     

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.     

Distractor effects during processing of words under load

The perceptual load model of attention (Lavie, 1995) suggests that processing of irrelevant distractors depends on the extent to which a relevant task engages full perceptual capacity. Word recognition models suggest that letter perception is facilitated in words relative to nonwords. These models led us to hypothesize that increasing the number of letters would increase perceptual load more for nonwords than for words, and thus would be more likely to exhaust capacity and eliminate distractor processing for nonwords than for words. In support of this hypothesis, we found that increasing the number of search letters increases RTs more for nonwords than for words and only reduces distractor interference for nonwords. Thus, although readers process words more efficiently than nonwords, they also become more prone to distraction when processing words.     

Concurrent working memory load can facilitate selective attention: evidence for specialized load

Load theory predicts that concurrent working memory load impairs selective attention and increases distractor interference (N. Lavie, A. Hirst, J. W. de Fockert, & E. Viding). Here, the authors present new evidence that the type of concurrent working memory load determines whether load impairs selective attention or not. Working memory load was paired with a same/different matching task that required focusing on targets while ignoring distractors. When working memory items shared the same limited-capacity processing mechanisms with targets in the matching task, distractor interference increased. However, when working memory items shared processing with distractors in the matching task, distractor interference decreased, facilitating target selection. A specialized load account is proposed to describe the dissociable effects of working memory load on selective processing depending on whether the load overlaps with targets or with distractors.     

Preschoolers out of adults: Discriminative learning with a cognitive load

This paper explores novel predictions from the spontaneous overtraining interpretation of human discrimination shift learning (Sirois & Shultz, 1998a). Results from six experiments where adults perform a discrimination shift task with or without a cognitive distractor are reported. In three experiments with a concurrent distractor task (Experiments 1A, 2A, and 3A), performance of adults is comparable to what would be expected from preschoolers performing only the learning task. These adults show no dimensional transfer from initial learning, unless new attributes are introduced in shift learning. On the same tasks without a cognitive load (Experiments 1B, 2B, and 3B), performance is typical of normal adults. The discussion focuses on the relative ability of competing theoretical models (i.e., levels of processing, attentional mediation, and perceptual differentiation) to account for these data.     

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.     

High perceptual load makes everybody equal: eliminating individual differences in distractibility with load

Perceptual load has been found to be a powerful determinant of distractibility in laboratory tasks. The present study assessed how the effects of perceptual load on distractibility in the laboratory relate to individual differences in the likelihood of distractibility in daily life. Sixty-one subjects performed a response-competition task in which perceptual load was varied. As expected, individuals reporting high levels of distractibility (on the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire, an established measure of distractibility in daily life) experienced greater distractor interference than did individuals reporting low levels. The critical finding, however, was that this relationship was confined to task conditions of low perceptual load: High perceptual load reduced distractor interference for all subjects, eliminating any individual differences. These findings suggest that the level of perceptual load in a task can predict whether individual differences in distractibility will be found and that high-load modifications of daily tasks may prove useful in preventing unwanted consequences of high distractibility.     

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.