Nilli Lavie

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.

Perceptual load as a major determinant of the locus of selection in visual attention.

In this paper, we propose that the debate concerning the locus of attentional selection can be resolved by specifying the conditions under which early selection is possible. In the first part, we present a theoretical discussion that integrates aspects from structural and capacity approaches to attention and suggest that perceptual load is a major factor in determining the locus of selection. In the second part, we present a literature review that examines the conditions influencing the processing of irrelevant information. This review supports the conclusion that a clear physical distinction between relevant and irrelevant information is not sufficient to prevent irrelevant processing; early selection also requires that the perceptual load of the task be sufficiently high to exceed the upper limit of available attentional resources.

Neural correlates of change detection and change blindness

Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) of subjects attempting to detect a visual change occurring during a screen flicker was used to distinguish the neural correlates of change detection from those of change blindness. Change detection resulted in enhanced activity in the parietal and right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex as well as category-selective regions of the extrastriate visual cortex (for example, fusiform gyrus for changing faces). Although change blindness resulted in some extrastriate activity, the dorsal activations were clearly absent. These results demonstrate the importance of parietal and dorsolateral frontal activations for conscious detection of changes in properties coded in the ventral visual pathway, and thus suggest a key involvement of dorsal–ventral interactions in visual awareness.

On the Efficiency of Visual Selective Attention: Efficient Visual Search Leads to Inefficient Distractor Rejection

The ability to ignore irrelevant peripheral distractors was assessed as a function of the efficiency in visual search for a target at the center of a 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

Attention, Distraction, and Cognitive Control Under Load

The extent to which people can focus attention in the face of irrelevant distractions has been shown to critically depend on the level and type of information load involved in their current task. The ability to focus attention improves under task conditions of high perceptual load but deteriorates under conditions of high load on cognitive control processes such as working memory. I review recent research on the effects of load on visual awareness and brain activity, including changing effects over the life span, and I outline the consequences for distraction and inattention in daily life and in clinical populations.

Changing Faces: A Detection Advantage in the Flicker Paradigm

Observers seem surprisingly poor at detecting changes in images following a large transient or flicker. In this study, we compared this change blindness phenomenon between human faces and other common objects (e.g., clothes). We found that changes were detected far more rapidly and accurately in faces than in other objects. This advantage for faces, however, was found only for upright faces in multiple-object arrays, and was completely eliminated when displays showed one photograph only or when the pictures were inverted. These results suggest a special role for faces in competition for visual attention, and provide support for previous claims that human faces are processed differently than stimuli that may be of less biological significance.

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.

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.

The role of perceptual load in negative priming.

Negative priming (NP) effects from irrelevant distractors were assessed as a function of perceptual load in the processing of prime targets. Participants searched for a target letter among a varying number of nontarget letters in the center of the display and ignored an irrelevant peripheral distractor. NP from this distractor was found to depend on the relevant search set size, decreasing as this set size was increased. The authors conclude that exhausting attention in relevant processing reduces irrelevant processing (e.g., N. Lavie, 1995), leaving less distractor processing to produce NP. This conclusion is consistent with recent reactive inhibition views for NP (e.g., G. Houghton, S. P. Tipper, B. Weaver, & D. I. Shore, 1996).

On the spatial extent of attention in object-based visual selection

A new test was devised to avoid previous confounds in measures of object-based limits on divided visual attention. The distinction between objects was manipulated across a wide spatial extent. Target elements appeared on the same object only when far apart, and appeared close only when on different objects, so that object effects could not be reduced to spatial effects, nor vice versa. Subjects judged whether two odd elements within a display of two dashed lines were the same or different. They performed better when the target elements were far apart on a common line rather than on two distinct lines, even though the latter arrangement was more likely. Thus, nonstrategic object-based limits on divided attention can arise even across large distances. However, when subjects were precued to expect targets in a narrow region of the display, the object effect was eliminated, implying that object-based selection may only operate within spatially attended regions.