Ten simple rules to study distractor suppression

Modality-specific impacts of distractors on visual and auditory categorical decision-making: an evidence accumulation perspective

Our brain constantly processes multisensory inputs to make decisions and guide behaviors, but how goal-relevant processes are influenced by irrelevant information is unclear. Here, we investigated the effects of intermodal and intramodal task-irrelevant information on visual and auditory categorical decision-making. In both visual and auditory tasks, we manipulated the modality of irrelevant inputs (visual vs. auditory vs. none) and used linear discrimination analysis of EEG and hierarchical drift-diffusion modeling (HDDM) to identify when and how task-irrelevant information affected decision-relevant processing. The results revealed modality-specific impacts of irrelevant inputs on visual and auditory categorical decision-making. The distinct effects on the visual task were shown on the neural components, with auditory distractors amplifying the sensory processing whereas visual distractors amplifying the post-sensory process. Conversely, the distinct effects on the auditory task were shown in behavioral performance and underlying cognitive processes. Visual distractors facilitate behavioral performance and affect both stages, but auditory distractors interfere with behavioral performance and impact on the sensory processing rather than the post-sensory decision stage. Overall, these findings suggested that auditory distractors affect the sensory processing stage of both tasks while visual distractors affect the post-sensory decision stage of visual categorical decision-making and both stages of auditory categorical decision-making. This study provides insights into how humans process information from multiple sensory modalities during decision-making by leveraging modality-specific impacts.

Swift attenuation of irrelevant features through feature consistency: Evidence from a capture-probe version of the contingent-capture protocol

In the present two experiments, we explore the possibility of swift attenuation of capture by irrelevant features in the contingent-capture protocol. Some prior research suggests that feature attenuation might be most efficient for fixed, anticipated irrelevant features and that varying irrelevant features from trial to trial can undermine their successful attenuation. Here, we exploited this dependence of attenuation on feature certainty to test if attenuation contributed to contingent-capture effects in a capture-probe version of the contingent-capture protocol. In line with the swift attenuation of irrelevant features, salient but target-dissimilar singleton cues that were consistently coloured diminished recall of probes at their locations. This was in comparison to inconsistently coloured target-dissimilar singleton cues. Nonetheless, probe-recall was still better at target-dissimilar cue locations than at non-singleton locations in the cueing display, indicating attenuation of task-irrelevant features rather than their complete suppression.

Identifying individual's distractor suppression using functional connectivity between anatomical large-scale brain regions

Distractor suppression (DS) is crucial in goal-oriented behaviors, referring to the ability to suppress irrelevant information. Current evidence points to the prefrontal cortex as an origin region of DS, while subcortical, occipital, and temporal regions are also implicated. The present study aimed to examine the contribution of communications between these brain regions to visual DS. To do it, we recruited two independent cohorts of participants for the study. One cohort participated in a visual search experiment where a salient distractor triggering distractor suppression to measure their DS and the other cohort filled out a Cognitive Failure Questionnaire to assess distractibility in daily life. Both cohorts collected resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI) data to investigate function connectivity (FC) underlying DS. First, we generated predictive models of the DS measured in visual search task using resting-state functional connectivity between large anatomical regions. It turned out that the models could successfully predict individual's DS, indicated by a significant correlation between the actual and predicted DS (r = 0.32, p < 0.01). Importantly, Prefrontal-Temporal, Insula-Limbic and Parietal-Occipital connections contributed to the prediction model. Furthermore, the model could also predict individual's daily distractibility in the other independent cohort (r = -0.34, p < 0.05). Our findings showed the efficiency of the predictive models of distractor suppression encompassing connections between large anatomical regions and highlighted the importance of the communications between attention-related and visual information processing regions in distractor suppression. Current findings may potentially provide neurobiological markers of visual distractor suppression.

Smooth pursuit inhibition reveals audiovisual enhancement of fast movement control

The sudden onset of a visual object or event elicits an inhibition of eye movements at latencies approaching the minimum delay of visuomotor conductance in the brain. Typically, information presented via multiple sensory modalities, such as sound and vision, evokes stronger and more robust responses than unisensory information. Whether and how multisensory information affects ultra-short latency oculomotor inhibition is unknown. In two experiments, we investigate smooth pursuit and saccadic inhibition in response to multisensory distractors. Observers tracked a horizontally moving dot and were interrupted by an unpredictable visual, auditory, or audiovisual distractor. Distractors elicited a transient inhibition of pursuit eye velocity and catch-up saccade rate within ∼100 ms of their onset. Audiovisual distractors evoked stronger oculomotor inhibition than visual- or auditory-only distractors, indicating multisensory response enhancement. Multisensory response enhancement magnitudes were equal to the linear sum of responses to component stimuli. These results demonstrate that multisensory information affects eye movements even at ultra-short latencies, establishing a lower time boundary for multisensory-guided behavior. We conclude that oculomotor circuits must have privileged access to sensory information from multiple modalities, presumably via a fast, subcortical pathway.

Terms of debate: Consensus definitions to guide the scientific discourse on visual distraction

Hypothesis-driven research rests on clearly articulated scientific theories. The building blocks for communicating these theories are scientific terms. Obviously, communication - and thus, scientific progress - is hampered if the meaning of these terms varies idiosyncratically across (sub)fields and even across individual researchers within the same subfield. We have formed an international group of experts representing various theoretical stances with the goal to homogenize the use of the terms that are most relevant to fundamental research on visual distraction in visual search. Our discussions revealed striking heterogeneity and we had to invest much time and effort to increase our mutual understanding of each other's use of central terms, which turned out to be strongly related to our respective theoretical positions. We present the outcomes of these discussions in a glossary and provide some context in several essays. Specifically, we explicate how central terms are used in the distraction literature and consensually sharpen their definitions in order to enable communication across theoretical standpoints. Where applicable, we also explain how the respective constructs can be measured. We believe that this novel type of adversarial collaboration can serve as a model for other fields of psychological research that strive to build a solid groundwork for theorizing and communicating by establishing a common language. For the field of visual distraction, the present paper should facilitate communication across theoretical standpoints and may serve as an introduction and reference text for newcomers.

Statistical learning of target and distractor spatial probability shape a common attentional priority computation

Converging evidence recently put forward the notion that dedicated neurocognitive mechanisms do exist for the suppression of salient, but irrelevant distractors. Along this line, it is plausible to hypothesize that, in appropriate contexts, experience-dependent forms of attentional learning might selectively induce plastic changes within this dedicated circuitry, thus allowing an independent shaping of priorities at the service of attentional filtering. Conversely, previous work suggested that statistical learning (SL) of both target and distractor spatial probability distributions converge in adjusting only the overall attentional priority of locations: in fact, in the presence of an independent manipulation, either related to the target or to the distractor only, SL induces indirect effects (e.g., changes in filtering efficiency due to an uneven distribution of targets), suggesting that SL-induced plastic changes affect a shared neural substrate. Here we tested whether, when (conflicting) target- and distractor-related manipulations are concurrently applied to the very same locations, dedicated mechanisms might support the selective encoding of spatial priority in relation to the specific attentional operation involved. In three related experiments, human healthy participants discriminated the direction of a target arrow, while ignoring a salient distractor, if present; both target and distractor spatial probability distributions were concurrently manipulated in relation to each single location. Critically, the selection bias produced by the target-related SL was marginally reduced by an adverse distractor contingency, and the suppression bias generated by the distractor-related SL was erased, or even reversed, by an adverse target contingency. Our results suggest that even conflicting target- and distractor-related SL manipulations result in the adjustment of a unique spatial priority computation, likely because the process directly relies on direct plastic alterations of shared spatial priority map(s).

The role of salience in the suppression of distracting stimuli

Researchers have long debated whether salient distractors have the power to automatically capture attention. Recent research has suggested a potential resolution, called the signal suppression hypothesis, whereby salient distractors produce a bottom-up salience signal, but can be suppressed to prevent visual distraction. This account, however, has been criticized on the grounds that previous studies may have used distractors that were only weakly salient. This claim has been difficult to empirically test because there are currently no well-established measures of salience. The current study addresses this by introducing a psychophysical technique to measure salience. First, we generated displays that aimed to manipulate the salience of two color singletons via color contrast. We then verified that this manipulation was successful using a psychophysical technique to determine the minimum exposure duration required to detect each color singleton. The key finding was that high-contrast singletons were detected at briefer exposure thresholds than low-contrast singletons, suggesting that high-contrast singletons were more salient. Next, we evaluated the participants' ability to ignore these singletons in a task in which they were task irrelevant. The results showed that, if anything, high-salience singletons were more strongly suppressed than low-salience singletons. These results generally support the signal suppression hypothesis and refute claims that highly salient singletons cannot be ignored.

The influence of hatha yoga on stress, anxiety, and suppression: A randomized controlled trial

Engaging in yoga may mitigate stress and anxiety in individuals while potentially enhancing one's capacity to manage distractions. Our research aimed to explore the relation between these two outcomes: Can an eight-week yoga program foster distraction suppression, thereby reducing stress and discomfort? To answer this question, we used Hatha Yoga, the most commonly practiced form of yoga. We tested if the intervention improved participants' ability to suppress distractions and selectively decrease self-reported stress and stress reactivity. In Addition, we investigated whether such an intervention would increase participants' mindfulness. Our study included 98 healthy yoga novices between 18 and 40 years who were randomly assigned to either an experimental or a waitlist condition, with each participant completing pre- and post-intervention assessments, including questionnaires, as well as electrophysiological and behavioral measures. After eight weeks of yoga practice, significant reductions in self-reported stress and stress reactivity levels, as well as increased mindfulness, were observed among those participating in the intervention relative to those in the waitlist control group. There were, however, no significant changes in state or trait anxiety due to the intervention. Changes in stress measures could not be explained by changes in participants' ability to suppress distractors, which was not affected by the intervention. Overall, our findings suggest that regular participation in Hatha Yoga can improve mental health outcomes without impacting cognitive functioning directly related to distractor suppression. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05232422.

Alpha oscillations protect working memory against distracters in a modality-specific way

Alpha oscillations are thought to be involved in suppressing distracting input in working-memory tasks. Yet, the spatial-temporal dynamics of such suppression remain unclear. Key questions are whether such suppression reflects a domain-general inattentiveness mechanism, or occurs in a stimulus- or modality-specific manner within cortical areas most responsive to the distracters; and whether the suppression is proactive (i.e., preparatory) or reactive. Here, we addressed these questions using a working-memory task where participants had to memorize an array of visually presented digits and reproduce one of them upon being probed. We manipulated the presence of distracters and the sensory modality in which distracters were presented during memory maintenance. Our results show that sensory areas most responsive to visual and auditory distracters exhibited stronger alpha power increase after visual and auditory distracter presentation respectively. These results suggest that alpha oscillations underlie distracter suppression in a reactive, modality-specific manner.

Distractor suppression does and does not depend on pre-distractor alpha-band activity

Selective attention enhances behaviorally important information and suppresses distracting information. Research on the neural basis of selective attention has largely focused on sensory enhancement, with less focus on sensory suppression. Enhancement and suppression can operate through a push-pull relationship that arises from competitive interactions among neural populations. There has been considerable debate, however, regarding (i) whether suppression can also operate independent of enhancement and (ii) whether neural processes associated with the voluntary deployment of suppression can occur prior to distractor onset. We provide further behavioral and electrophysiological evidence of independent suppression at cued distractor locations while humans performed a visual search task. We specifically utilize two established EEG markers of suppression: alpha power (∼8-15 Hz) and the distractor positivity (P _D ). Increased alpha power has been linked with attenuated sensory processing, while the P _D -a component of event-related potentials-has been linked with successful distractor suppression. The present results demonstrate that cueing the location of an upcoming distractor speeded responding and led to an earlier onset P _D , consistent with earlier suppression due to strategic use of a spatial cue. We further demonstrate that higher pre-distractor alpha power contralateral to distractors was generally associated with successful suppression on both cued and non-cued trials. However, there was no consistent change in alpha power associated with the spatial cue, meaning cueing effects on behavioral and neural measures occurred independent of alpha-related gating of sensory processing. These findings reveal the importance of pre-distractor neural processes for subsequent distractor suppression.

Significance Statement

Selective suppression of distracting information is important for survival, contributing to preferential processing of behaviorally important information. Does foreknowledge of an upcoming distractor's location help with suppression? Here, we recorded EEG while subjects performed a target detection task with cues that indicated the location of upcoming distractors. Behavioral and electrophysiological results revealed that foreknowledge of a distractor's location speeded suppression, thereby facilitating target detection. The results further revealed a significant relationship between pre-stimulus alpha-band activity and successful suppression; however, pre-stimulus alpha-band activity was not consistently lateralized relative to the spatially informative cues. The present findings therefore demonstrate that target detection can benefit from foreknowledge of distractor location in a process that is independent of alpha-related gating of sensory processing.

Contextual and Temporal Constraints for Attentional Capture: Commentary on Theeuwes' 2023 Review "The Attentional Capture Debate: When Can We Avoid Salient Distractors and when Not?"

Salient distractors demand our attention. Their salience, derived from intensity, relative contrast or learned relevance, captures our limited information capacity. This is typically an adaptive response as salient stimuli may require an immediate change in behaviour. However, sometimes apparent salient distractors do not capture attention. Theeuwes, in his recent commentary, has proposed certain boundary conditions of the visual scene that result in one of two search modes, serial or parallel, that determine whether we can avoid salient distractors or not. Here, we argue that a more complete theory should consider the temporal and contextual factors that influence the very salience of the distractor itself.

Neurophysiological Measures of Proactive and Reactive Control in Negative Template Use

In a visual search task, knowing features of distractors in advance leads to a more efficient visual search. Although previous studies suggested that the benefits of these negative cues rely on attentional control, it is unclear whether proactive or reactive control is involved. In this study, we analyzed the EEG data of participants performing a visual search task (n = 14). Participants searched for a shape-defined target after receiving a positive cue (target color), negative cue (distractor color), or neutral cue (non-informative). To examine proactive control, we measured EEG after the cue onset but before visual search. Our time-frequency analysis revealed a higher power of theta oscillations over frontoparietal regions after the negative cues compared with the positive and neutral cues, as well as higher theta phase synchronization within the prefrontal region, demonstrating negative cues rely more heavily on proactive control compared with other cue types. To examine reactive control, we measured EEG after the search onset. We found a lateralization of posterior alpha power toward the target side in both positive and negative cues conditions, with a later lateralization observed after negative cues. Interestingly, we observed a significant relationship between the increase of proactive theta power after negative cues and the decrease of reactive alpha power after the search. This suggests the coordination of proactive and reactive mechanisms lead to the most efficient search.

Induced alpha and beta electroencephalographic rhythms covary with single-trial speech intelligibility in competition

Neurophysiological studies suggest that intrinsic brain oscillations influence sensory processing, especially of rhythmic stimuli like speech. Prior work suggests that brain rhythms may mediate perceptual grouping and selective attention to speech amidst competing sound, as well as more linguistic aspects of speech processing like predictive coding. However, we know of no prior studies that have directly tested, at the single-trial level, whether brain oscillations relate to speech-in-noise outcomes. Here, we combined electroencephalography while simultaneously measuring intelligibility of spoken sentences amidst two different interfering sounds: multi-talker babble or speech-shaped noise. We find that induced parieto-occipital alpha (7-15 Hz; thought to modulate attentional focus) and frontal beta (13-30 Hz; associated with maintenance of the current sensorimotor state and predictive coding) oscillations covary with trial-wise percent-correct scores; importantly, alpha and beta power provide significant independent contributions to predicting single-trial behavioral outcomes. These results can inform models of speech processing and guide noninvasive measures to index different neural processes that together support complex listening.

Target enhancement but not distractor suppression in auditory neural tracking during continuous speech

Selective attention modulates the neural tracking of speech in auditory cortical regions. It is unclear whether this attentional modulation is dominated by enhanced target tracking, or suppression of distraction. To settle this long-standing debate, we employed an augmented electroencephalography (EEG) speech-tracking paradigm with target, distractor, and neutral streams. Concurrent target speech and distractor (i.e., sometimes relevant) speech were juxtaposed with a third, never task-relevant speech stream serving as neutral baseline. Listeners had to detect short target repeats and committed more false alarms originating from the distractor than from the neutral stream. Speech tracking revealed target enhancement but no distractor suppression below the neutral baseline. Speech tracking of the target (not distractor or neutral speech) explained single-trial accuracy in repeat detection. In sum, the enhanced neural representation of target speech is specific to processes of attentional gain for behaviorally relevant target speech rather than neural suppression of distraction.

Decoding of Working Memory Contents in Auditory Cortex Is Not Distractor-Resistant

Working memory enables the temporary storage of relevant information in the service of behavior. Neuroimaging studies have suggested that sensory cortex is involved in maintaining contents in working memory. This raised the question of how sensory regions maintain memory representations during the exposure to distracting stimuli. Multivariate pattern analysis of fMRI signals in visual cortex has shown that the contents of visual working memory could be decoded concurrently with passively viewed distractors. The present fMRI study tested whether this finding extends to auditory working memory and to active distractor processing. We asked participants to memorize the pitch of a target sound and to compare it with a probe sound presented after a 13 s delay period. In separate conditions, we compared a blank delay phase (no distraction) with either passive listening to, or active processing of, an auditory distractor presented throughout the memory delay. Consistent with previous reports, pitch-specific memory information could be decoded in auditory cortex during the delay in trials without distraction. In contrast, decoding of target sounds in early auditory cortex dropped to chance level during both passive and active distraction. This was paralleled by memory performance decrements under distraction. Extending the analyses beyond sensory cortex yielded some evidence for memory content-specific activity in inferior frontal and superior parietal cortex during active distraction. In summary, while our findings question the involvement of early auditory cortex in the maintenance of distractor-resistant working memory contents, further research should elucidate the role of hierarchically higher regions.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Information about sensory features held in working memory can be read out from hemodynamic activity recorded in human sensory cortices. Moreover, visual cortex can in parallel store visual content and process newly incoming, task-irrelevant visual input. The present study investigated the role of auditory cortex for working memory maintenance under distraction. While memorized sound frequencies could be decoded in auditory cortex in the absence of distraction, auditory distraction during the delay phase impaired memory performance and prevented decoding of information stored in working memory. Apparently, early auditory cortex is not sufficient to represent working memory contents under distraction that impairs performance. However, exploratory analyses indicated that, under distraction, higher-order frontal and parietal regions might contribute to content-specific working memory storage.

Slow neural oscillations explain temporal fluctuations in distractibility

Human environments comprise various sources of distraction, which often occur unexpectedly in time. The proneness to distraction (i.e., distractibility) is posited to be independent of attentional sampling of targets, but its temporal dynamics and neurobiological basis are largely unknown. Brain oscillations in the theta band (3 - 8Hz) have been associated with fluctuating neural excitability, which is hypothesised here to explain rhythmic modulation of distractibility. In a pitch discrimination task (N = 30) with unexpected auditory distractors, we show that distractor-evoked neural responses in the electroencephalogram and perceptual susceptibility to distraction were co-modulated and cycled approximately 3 - 5 times per second. Pre-distractor neural phase in left inferior frontal and insular cortex regions explained fluctuating distractibility. Thus, human distractibility is not constant but fluctuates on a subsecond timescale. Furthermore, slow neural oscillations subserve the behavioural consequences of a hitherto largely unexplained but ever-increasing phenomenon in modern environments - distraction by unexpected sound.

Evidence of target enhancement and distractor suppression in early visual areas

Although the mechanisms of target enhancement and distractor suppression have been investigated along the visual processing hierarchy, there remains some unknown as to the role of perceptual load on the competition between different task-related information as attention deployment is manipulated. We present an fMRI spatial cueing paradigm, in which 32 participants had to attend to either a left or a right hemifield location and to indicate the orientation of the target Gabor that was presented simultaneously to a noise patch distractor. Critically, the target could appear at either the cued, valid location or at the uncued, invalid location; in the latter, the noise patch distractor appeared at the cued location. Perceptual load was manipulated by the presence or absence of high-contrast Gabor patches close to the fixation cross, which acted as lateral masks. Behavioural results indicated that participants performed more efficiently in validly cued trials compared to invalidly cued trials and under low compared to high load. Enhancement effects for targets and suppression effects for noise patches were greater in early visual areas at high load, that is in the presence of lateral masks. These results are in line with the hypothesis that attention results in both target enhancement and distractor suppression, and that these effects are most marked under high perceptual load. Theoretical implications of these results for different models of attention are discussed.

Suppression of distracting inputs by visual-spatial cues is driven by anticipatory alpha activity

A growing body of research demonstrates that distracting inputs can be proactively suppressed via spatial cues, nonspatial cues, or experience, which are governed by more than one top-down mechanism of attention. However, how the neural mechanisms underlying spatial distractor cues guide proactive suppression of distracting inputs remains unresolved. Here, we recorded electroencephalography signals from 110 participants in 3 experiments to identify the role of alpha activity in proactive distractor suppression induced by spatial cues and its influence on subsequent distractor inhibition. Behaviorally, we found novel changes in the spatial proximity of the distractor: Cueing distractors far away from the target improves search performance for the target, while cueing distractors close to the target hampers performance. Crucially, we found dynamic characteristics of spatial representation for distractor suppression during anticipation. This result was further verified by alpha power increased relatively contralateral to the cued distractor. At both the between- and within-subjects levels, we found that these activities further predicted the decrement of the subsequent PD component, which was indicative of reduced distractor interference. Moreover, anticipatory alpha activity and its link with the subsequent PD component were specific to the high predictive validity of distractor cue. Together, our results reveal the underlying neural mechanisms by which cueing the spatial distractor may contribute to reduced distractor interference. These results also provide evidence supporting the role of alpha activity as gating by proactive suppression.

"Unattended, distracting or irrelevant": Theoretical implications of terminological choices in auditory selective attention research

For seventy years, auditory selective attention research has focused on studying the cognitive mechanisms of prioritizing the processing a 'main' task-relevant stimulus, in the presence of 'other' stimuli. However, a closer look at this body of literature reveals deep empirical inconsistencies and theoretical confusion regarding the extent to which this 'other' stimulus is processed. We argue that many key debates regarding attention arise, at least in part, from inappropriate terminological choices for experimental variables that may not accurately map onto the cognitive constructs they are meant to describe. Here we critically review the more common or disruptive terminological ambiguities, differentiate between methodology-based and theory-derived terms, and unpack the theoretical assumptions underlying different terminological choices. Particularly, we offer an in-depth analysis of the terms 'unattended' and 'distractor' and demonstrate how their use can lead to conflicting theoretical inferences. We also offer a framework for thinking about terminology in a more productive and precise way, in hope of fostering more productive debates and promoting more nuanced and accurate cognitive models of selective attention.

Attentional modulation as a mechanism for enhanced facial emotion discrimination: The case of action video game players

Action video game players (AVGPs) outperform nonvideo game players (NVGPs) on a wide variety of attentional tasks, mediating benefits to perceptual and cognitive decision processes. A key issue in the literature is the extent to which such benefits transfer beyond cognition. Using steady-state visual evoked potentials (SSVEP) as a neural measure of attentional resource allocation, we investigated whether the attentional benefit of AVGPs generalizes to the processing of rapidly presented facial emotions. AVGPs (n = 36) and NVGPs (n = 32) performed a novel, attention-demanding emotion discrimination task, requiring the identification of a target emotion in one of two laterally presented streams of emotional faces. The emotional faces flickered at either 2.0 Hz or 2.5 Hz. AVGPs outperformed NVGPs at detecting the target emotions regardless of the type of emotion. Correspondingly, attentional modulation of the SSVEP at parieto-occipital recording sites was larger in AVGPs compared with NVGPs. This difference appeared to be driven by a larger response to attended information, as opposed to a reduced response to irrelevant distractor information. Exploratory analyses confirmed that this novel paradigm elicited the expected pattern of event-related potentials associated with target detection and error processing. These components did not, however, differ between groups. Overall, the results indicate enhanced discrimination of facial emotions in AVGPs arising from enhanced attentional processing of emotional information. This presents evidence for the attentional advantage of AVGPs to extend beyond perceptual and cognitive processes.

Age-related differences in frontoparietal activation for target and distractor singletons during visual search

Age-related decline in visual search performance has been associated with different patterns of activation in frontoparietal regions using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), but whether these age-related effects represent specific influences of target and distractor processing is unclear. Therefore, we acquired event-related fMRI data from 68 healthy, community-dwelling adults ages 18-78 years, during both conjunction (T/F target among rotated Ts and Fs) and feature (T/F target among Os) search. Some displays contained a color singleton that could correspond to either the target or a distractor. A diffusion decision analysis indicated age-related increases in sensorimotor response time across all task conditions, but an age-related decrease in the rate of evidence accumulation (drift rate) was specific to conjunction search. Moreover, the color singleton facilitated search performance when occurring as a target and disrupted performance when occurring as a distractor, but only during conjunction search, and these effects were independent of age. The fMRI data indicated that decreased search efficiency for conjunction relative to feature search was evident as widespread frontoparietal activation. Activation within the left insula mediated the age-related decrease in drift rate for conjunction search, whereas this relation in the FEF and parietal cortex was significant only for individuals younger than 30 or 44 years, respectively. Finally, distractor singletons were associated with significant parietal activation, whereas target singletons were associated with significant frontoparietal deactivation, and this latter effect increased with adult age. Age-related differences in frontoparietal activation therefore reflect both the overall efficiency of search and the enhancement from salient targets.

Top-down auditory attention modulates neural responses more strongly in neurotypical than ADHD young adults

Human cognitive abilities naturally vary along a spectrum, even among those we call "neurotypical". Individuals differ in their ability to selectively attend to goal-relevant auditory stimuli. We sought to characterize this variability in a cohort of people with diverse attentional functioning. We recruited both neurotypical (N = 20) and ADHD (N = 25) young adults, all with normal hearing. Participants listened to one of three concurrent, spatially separated speech streams and reported the order of the syllables in that stream while we recorded electroencephalography (EEG). We tested both the ability to sustain attentional focus on a single "Target" stream and the ability to monitor the Target but flexibly either ignore or switch attention to an unpredictable "Interrupter" stream from another direction that sometimes appeared. Although differences in both stimulus structure and task demands affected behavioral performance, ADHD status did not. In both groups, the Interrupter evoked larger neural responses when it was to be attended compared to when it was irrelevant, including for the P3a "reorienting" response previously described as involuntary. This attentional modulation was weaker in ADHD listeners, even though their behavioral performance was the same. Across the entire cohort, individual performance correlated with the degree of top-down modulation of neural responses. These results demonstrate that listeners differ in their ability to modulate neural representations of sound based on task goals, while suggesting that adults with ADHD may have weaker volitional control of attentional processes than their neurotypical counterparts.

Motivation by reward jointly improves speed and accuracy, whereas task-relevance and meaningful images do not

Visual selection is characterized by a trade-off between speed and accuracy. Speed or accuracy of the selection process can be affected by higher level factors—for example, expecting a reward, obtaining task-relevant information, or seeing an intrinsically relevant target. Recently, motivation by reward has been shown to simultaneously increase speed and accuracy, thus going beyond the speed–accuracy-trade-off. Here, we compared the motivating abilities of monetary reward, task-relevance, and image content to simultaneously increase speed and accuracy. We used a saccadic distraction task that required suppressing a distractor and selecting a target. Across different blocks successful target selection was followed either by (i) a monetary reward, (ii) obtaining task-relevant information, or (iii) seeing the face of a famous person. Each block additionally contained the same number of irrelevant trials lacking these consequences, and participants were informed about the upcoming trial type. We found that postsaccadic vision of a face affected neither speed nor accuracy, suggesting that image content does not affect visual selection via motivational mechanisms. Task relevance increased speed but decreased selection accuracy, an observation compatible with a classical speed–accuracy trade-off. Motivation by reward, however, simultaneously increased response speed and accuracy. Saccades in all conditions deviated away from the distractor, suggesting that the distractor was suppressed, and this deviation was strongest in the reward block. Drift-diffusion modelling revealed that task-relevance affected behavior by affecting decision thresholds, whereas motivation by reward additionally increased the rate of information uptake. The present findings thus show that the three consequences differ in their motivational abilities.

Learned low priority of attention after training to suppress color singleton distractor

Allocating attention to significant events, such as a salient object, is effortless. Our brain is effective on this type of processing because doing so is generally beneficial for survival. However, a salient object could also be distracting and ignoring it costs a large amount of cognitive resource. In the present study, we conducted two behavioral experiments to investigate the effect of learned suppression of a salient color. Particularly, we were interested in the effect of learning in a new task context in which the previously suppressed color was task irrelevant. In Experiment 1, we trained the participants for five days with explicit instruction to suppress a color singleton distractor in a visual search task. We measured the effect of training with a dot probe task before and after the training. Colors in the dot probe task only served as the background and were not associated with the position of the target dot. However, we found that attention was involuntarily biased away from the previously suppressed color. In Experiment 2, the color singleton could either be the target or distractor in the visual search task, making the suppression of the color singleton inefficient for task performance. The results showed no training effect in the dot probe task after this manipulation. These findings provided direct evidence for the learned low priority of attention after training to suppress the color singleton distractor.

Effects of temporally regular versus irregular distractors on goal-directed cognition and behavior

Human environments comprise plenty of task-irrelevant sensory inputs, which are potentially distracting. Auditory distractors often possess an inherent temporal structure. However, it is largely unknown whether and how the temporal regularity of distractors interferes with goal-directed cognitive processes, such as working memory. Here, we tested a total sample of N = 90 participants across four working memory tasks with sequences of temporally regular versus irregular distractors. Temporal irregularity was operationalized by a final tone onset time that violated an otherwise regular tone sequence (Experiment 1), by a sequence of tones with irregular onset-to-onset delays (Experiment 2), and by sequences of speech items with irregular onset-to-onset delays (Experiments 3 and 4). Across all experiments, temporal regularity of distractors did not modulate participants’ primary performance metric, that is, accuracy in recalling items from working memory. Instead, temporal regularity of distractors modulated secondary performance metrics: for regular versus irregular distractors, recall of the first item from memory was faster (Experiment 3) and the response bias was more conservative (Experiment 4). Taken together, the present results provide evidence that the temporal regularity of task-irrelevant input does not inevitably affect the precision of memory representations (reflected in the primary performance metric accuracy) but rather the response behavior (reflected in secondary performance metrics like response speed and bias). Our findings emphasize that a comprehensive understanding of auditory distraction requires that existing models of attention include often-neglected secondary performance metrics to understand how different features of auditory distraction reach awareness and impact cognition and behavior.

Oculomotor suppression of abrupt onsets versus color singletons

There is considerable evidence that salient items can be suppressed in order to prevent attentional capture. However, this evidence has relied almost exclusively on paradigms using color singletons as salient distractors. It is therefore unclear whether other kinds of salient stimuli, such as abrupt onsets, can also be suppressed. Using an additional singleton paradigm optimized for detecting oculomotor suppression, we directly compared color singletons with abrupt onsets. Participants searched for a target shape (e.g., green diamond) and attempted to ignore salient distractors that were either abrupt onsets or color singletons. First eye movements were used to assess whether salient distractors captured attention or were instead suppressed. Initial experiments using a type of abrupt onset from classic attentional capture studies (four white dots) revealed that abrupt onsets strongly captured attention whereas color singletons were suppressed. After controlling for important differences between the onsets and color singletons - such as luminance and color - abrupt-onset capture was reduced but not eliminated. We ultimately conclude that abrupt onsets are not suppressed like color singletons.