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.     

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.     

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.     

ON THE EFFICIENCY OF VISUAL SELECTIVE ATTENTION:

Abstract— The ability to ignore irrelevant peripheral distractors was assessed as a junction of the efficiency in visual search for a target at the center of display. Efficient target search, among dissimilar nontargets, led to greater distraction than inefficient search, among similar nontargets. This seemingly paradoxical result is predicted by the recent proposal (Lavie, 1995a) that irrelevant processing can be prevented only by increasing the load for relevant processing. Varying the set size of similar items in the central search task demonstrated that interference from irrelevant distractors was eliminated only with more than four relevant items. These results demonstrate how capacity limits determine the efficiency of selective attention, and raise questions about some standard assumptions of most visual search models.     

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。     

从知觉负载理论来理解选择性注意

知觉负载理论被认为解决了选择性注意研究的早选择和晚选择观点之争。当前任务对注意资源的耗用程度决定了与任务无关的干扰刺激得到多少加工,从而导致在低知觉负载下,注意资源自动溢出去加工干扰刺激（晚选择）,而在高知觉负载下,注意资源被当前任务耗尽而无法加工干扰刺激（早选择）。知觉负载理论提出后,研究者进行了一系列研究。一部分工作专注于知觉负载对选择性注意的调节作用;另外一些工作则关注其他认知过程如何影响注意资源的分配,其中知觉负载与工作记忆负载的关系是当前关注重点。     

Aging and response interference across sensory modalities

Advancing age is associated with decrements in selective attention. It was recently hypothesized that age-related differences in selective attention depend on sensory modality. The goal of the present study was to investigate the role of sensory modality in age-related vulnerability to distraction, using a response interference task. To this end, 16 younger (mean age = 23.1 years) and 24 older (mean age = 65.3 years) adults performed four response interference tasks, involving all combinations of visual and auditory targets and distractors. The results showed that response interference effects differ across sensory modalities, but not across age groups. These results indicate that sensory modality plays an important role in vulnerability to distraction, but not in age-related distractibility by irrelevant spatial information.     

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.     

The types of stimuli loaded in memory can modulate its effects on visual search

The effects of memory load in visual search (VS) have shown a diversity of results from the absence through beneficial and detrimental effects of a concurrent memory load in VS performance. One of the hypotheses intended to explain the heterogeneity of results follows the idea proposed by certain models in the context of VS that the contents of working memory (WM) can modulate the attentional processes involved in VS (Desimone & Duncan, 1995; Duncan & Humphreys, 1989). In four experiments, we manipulated the similarity of information maintained in WM and those materials playing the role of target and distractors in the VS task. The results showed a beneficial effect in the first two experiments, where the materials in WM matched the target in VS. However, when they matched the distractors in the attentional task there is no effect in the slope of the search function. Present results strengthen those theories supporting that visual working memory is fractionated to allow for maintenance of items not essential to the attentional task (Downing & Dodds, 2004).     

The role of modality: Auditory and visual distractors in Stroop interference

As a commonly used measure of selective attention, it is important to understand the factors contributing to interference in the Stroop task. The current research examined distracting stimuli in the auditory and visual modalities to determine whether the use of auditory distractors would create additional interference, beyond what is typically observed in the print-based Stroop task. Research by Cowan and Barron supported the additive effects of auditory and visual distractors; however, there is only one empirical demonstration of this finding to date. Using different versions of the Stroop colour-naming task, behavioural analyses of reaction times (RT) were conducted, along with distributional RT analyses. The results indicated that a combination of visual and auditory distraction did not lead to a larger interference effect than visually based distraction alone. These findings suggest that methodological issues may have influenced the prior finding of additive effects of the two modalities, and are discussed in relation to the word production architecture account of Stroop effects.     

Were you paying attention to where you looked? The role of executive working memory in visual search

Recent evidence has indicated that performing a working memory task that loads executive working memory leads to less efficient visual search (Han & Kim, 2004). We explored the role that executive functioning plays in visual search by examining the pattern of eye movements while participants performed a search task with or without a secondary executive working memory task. Results indicate that executive functioning plays two roles in visual search: the identification of objects and the control of the disengagement of attention.     

Attentional sets influence perceptual load effects,but not dilution effects

Perceptual load theory [Lavie, N. (1995). Perceptual load as a necessary condition for selective attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 451–468.; Lavie, N., & Tsal, Y. (1994) Perceptual load as a major determinant of the locus of selection in visual attention. Perception & Psychophysics, 56, 183–197.] proposes that interference from distractors can only be avoided in situations of high perceptual load. This theory has been supported by blocked design manipulations separating low load (when the target appears alone) and high load (when the target is embedded among neutral letters). Tsal and Benoni [(2010a). Diluting the burden of load: Perceptual load effects are simply dilution effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 1645–1656.; Benoni, H., & Tsal, Y. (2010). Where have we gone wrong? Perceptual load does not affect selective attention. Vision Research, 50, 1292–1298.] have recently shown that these manipulations confound perceptual load with “dilution” (the mere presence of additional heterogeneous items in high-load situations). Theeuwes, Kramer, and Belopolsky [(2004). Attentional set interacts with perceptual load in visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 697–702.] independently questioned load theory by suggesting that attentional sets might also affect distractor interference. When high load and low load were intermixed, and participants could not prepare for the presentation that followed, both the low-load and high-load trials showed distractor interference. This result may also challenge the dilution account, which proposes a stimulus-driven mechanism. In the current study, we presented subjects with both fixed and mixed blocks, including a mix of dilution trials with low-load trials and with high-load trials. We thus separated the effect of dilution from load and tested the influence of attentional sets on each component. The results revealed that whereas perceptual load effects are influenced by attentional sets, the dilution component is not. This strengthens the notion that dilution is a stimulus-driven mechanism, which enables effective selectivity.     

Complexity factors in visuo‐spatial working memory

Three experiments are presented that use a technique of selective interference—irrelevant pictures—to develop our understanding of visuo‐spatial working memory. Visual noise fields are used as the irrelevant pictures. Using two related measures of simple visual complexity, the experiments demonstrate that the greater the complexity the greater the degree of interference, even within a paradigm where subjects are instructed to look at but otherwise ignore the irrelevant pictures. Both the number of dots and the density of the dots comprising the visual noise fields affect the degree of interference in a concurrent memory task. In addition, increasing the size of the field increases the amount of interference. It is argued that the results give insight into the properties of visual working memory and contribute to its theoretical development. For example, it is argued that the store is directly accessible by externally presented interference and that particular aspects of the noise displays cause interference with visual memory.     

Complexity factors in visuo-spatial working memory

Three experiments are presented that use a technique of selective interference--irrelevant pictures--to develop our understanding of visuo-spatial working memory. Visual noise fields are used as the irrelevant pictures. Using two related measures of simple visual complexity, the experiments demonstrate that the greater the complexity the greater the degree of interference, even within a paradigm where subjects are instructed to look at but otherwise ignore the irrelevant pictures. Both the number of dots and the density of the dots comprising the visual noise fields affect the degree of interference in a concurrent memory task. In addition, increasing the size of the field increases the amount of interference. It is argued that the results give insight into the properties of visual working memory and contribute to its theoretical development. For example, it is argued that the store is directly accessible by externally presented interference and that particular aspects of the noise displays cause interference with visual memory.     

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.     

Self-relevance increases the irrelevant sound effect: Attentional disruption by one's own name

Memory performance is severely disrupted when task-irrelevant sound is played during item presentation or in a retention interval. Working memory models make contrasting assumptions on whether the semantic content of the auditory distractors modulates the irrelevant sound effect. In the present study, participants made more errors in serial recall when they had to ignore sentences containing their own name as opposed to that of a yoked-control partner. These results are only consistent with working memory models that allow for attentional processes to play a role in the explanation of the irrelevant sound effect. With repeated presentation the disruptive effect of one's own name decreased, whereas the disruptive effect of the auditory distractors in the control condition remained constant. The latter finding is most consistent with the duplex model of auditory attention, which assumes that the irrelevant sound effect is primarily caused by automatic interference of acoustic distractor features, but at the same time allows for a disruption of encoding due to attentional capture by unexpected deviants. However, to explain the present results, the mechanism responsible for the attentional capture has to be extended to highly (self-)relevant auditory distractors.     

网络成瘾倾向者在视觉工作记忆引导下的注意捕获

采用工作记忆任务和视觉搜索任务相结合的双任务范式, 探讨网络成瘾倾向者在视觉工作记忆引导下的注意捕获。实验1考察了单一分心刺激视场中分心刺激的性质对网络成瘾倾向者选择性注意的影响, 实验2通过控制匹配试验出现的概率来诱发不同的抑制动机, 探讨多分心刺激视场中两种抑制动机下网络成瘾倾向者的注意表现。结果发现：(1)无论在单一分心刺激还是多分心刺激视场中, 网络成瘾倾向被试的目标搜索反应时均显著短于正常组被试, 且两组的搜索正确率没有差异。(2)在单一分心刺激视场中, 无论是与工作记忆项目匹配还是不匹配的分心刺激都会捕获正常组被试的注意, 但不会捕获网络成瘾倾向被试的注意。(3)在多分心刺激视场中, 当抑制动机水平较低时, 两组被试均对匹配分心物产生注意捕获效应, 且网络成瘾倾向被试受工作记忆引导的注意捕获效应小于正常组被试; 当抑制动机较高时, 两组被试均对匹配分心物产生注意抑制效应, 且没有差异。研究结果表明, 面对非网络相关视觉刺激时, 网络成瘾倾向者受工作记忆引导的注意捕获效应小于正常组, 并表现出了知觉加工上的优势。     

无关长时记忆表征能否引导视觉注意选择?

与任务相关的长时记忆表征在引导视觉注意选择的过程中扮演着重要的角色,它可以使人们在熟悉的视觉情境中快速搜索目标刺激,并偏离干扰刺激。但当长时记忆表征与任务无关时,还能否引导视觉注意选择?目前还不清楚。实验1采用眼动追踪技术直接比较无关工作记忆表征与无关长时记忆表征在视觉搜索阶段对视觉注意的捕获效应,行为反应时与首次注视点百分率的结果都发现,当无关工作记忆表征在视觉搜索中再次出现时能引导视觉注意偏向到与之匹配的干扰刺激,但无关长时记忆表征并没有表现出类似的注意引导效应;实验2探讨记忆表征由工作记忆系统转移到长时记忆系统的过程中对视觉注意的引导效应,结果发现,随着记忆表征的转移,注意引导效应消失了,实验3排除工作记忆表征的干扰后,依然没有发现无关长时记忆表征对注意的引导效应。以上结果表明,无关长时记忆表征并不能像工作记忆表征一样引导视觉注意选择,工作记忆表征和长时记忆表征对视觉注意的引导属于两个不同的认知过程。     

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 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.