Risa Sawaki

Capture versus suppression of attention by salient singletons: electrophysiological evidence for an automatic attend-to-me signal.

There is considerable controversy about whether salient singletons capture attention in a bottom-up fashion, irrespective of top-down control settings. One possibility is that salient singletons always generate an attention capture signal, but this signal can be actively suppressed to avoid capture. In the present study, we investigated this issue by using event-related potential recordings, focusing on N2pc (N2-posterior-contralateral; a measure of attentional deployment) and Pd (distractor positivity; a measure of attentional suppression). Participants searched for a specific letter within one of two regions, and irrelevant color singletons were sometimes present. We found that the irrelevant singletons did not elicit N2pc but instead elicited Pd; this occurred equally within the attended and unattended regions. These findings suggest that salient singletons may automatically produce an attend-to-me signal, irrespective of top-down control settings, but this signal can be overridden by an active suppression process to prevent the actual capture of attention.

A Common Neural Mechanism for Preventing and Terminating the Allocation of Attention

Much is known about the mechanisms by which attention is focused to facilitate perception, but little is known about what happens to attention after perception of the attended object is complete. One possibility is that the focus of attention passively fades. A second possibility is that attention is actively terminated after the completion of perception so that the brain can be prepared for the next target. The present study investigated this issue with event-related potentials in humans, focusing on the N2pc component (a neural measure of attentional deployment) and the Pd component (a neural measure of attentional suppression). We found that active suppression occurred both to prevent the allocation of attention to known distractors and to terminate attention after the perception of an attended object was complete. In addition, the neural measure of active suppression was correlated with a behavioral measure of trial-to-trial variations in the allocation of attention. Active suppression therefore appears to be a general-purpose mechanism that both prevents and terminates the allocation of attention.

Active suppression of distractors that match the contents of visual working memory

The biased competition theory proposes that items matching the contents of visual working memory will automatically have an advantage in the competition for attention. However, evidence for an automatic effect has been mixed, perhaps because the memory-driven attentional bias can be overcome by top-down suppression. To test this hypothesis, the Pd component of the event-related potential waveform was used as a marker of attentional suppression. While observers maintained a colour in working memory, task-irrelevant probe arrays were presented that contained an item matching the colour being held in memory. We found that the memory-matching probe elicited a Pd component, indicating that it was being actively suppressed. This result suggests that sensory inputs matching the information being held in visual working memory are automatically detected and generate an “attend-to-me” signal, but this signal can be overridden by an active suppression mechanism to prevent the actual capture of attention.

Active suppression after involuntary capture of attention

After attention has been involuntarily captured by a distractor, how is it reoriented toward a target? One possibility is that attention to the distractor passively fades over time, allowing the target to become attended. Another possibility is that the captured location is actively suppressed so that attention can be directed toward the target location. The present study investigated this issue with event-related potentials (ERPs), focusing on the N2pc component (a neural measure of attentional deployment) and the Pd component (a neural measure of attentional suppression). Observers identified a color-defined target in a search array, which was preceded by a task-irrelevant cue array. When the cue array contained an item that matched the target color, this item captured attention (as measured both behaviorally and with the N2pc component). This capture of attention was followed by active suppression (indexed by the Pd component), and this was then followed by a reorienting of attention toward the target in the search array (indexed by the N2pc component). These findings indicate that the involuntary capture of attention by a distractor is followed by an active suppression process that presumably facilitates the subsequent voluntary orienting of attention to the target.

Effective Connectivity During Feature-Based Attentional Capture: Evidence Against the Attentional Reorienting Hypothesis of TPJ

The most prevalent neurobiological theory of attentional control posits 2 distinct brain networks: The dorsal and ventral attention networks. The role of the dorsal attentional network in top-down attentional control is well established, but there is less evidence for the putative role of the ventral attentional network in initiating stimulus-driven reorienting. Here, we used functional magnetic resonance imaging and dynamic causal modeling (DCM) to test the role of the ventral and dorsal networks in attentional reorienting during instances of attentional capture by a target-colored distracter. In the region of interest analyses, we found that frontal eye field (FEF) was selectively activated by conditions where attention was reoriented (i.e. to spatial cues and target-colored distracters). In contrast, temporoparietal junction (TPJ) responded positively to all stimulus conditions. The DCM results indicated that FEF received sensory inputs earlier than TPJ, and that only the connection from FEF to TPJ was modulated by the appearance of the target-colored distracter. The results provide novel empirical evidence against the idea that TPJ generates stimulus-driven reorientations of attention. We conclude that our results are incompatible with existing theories of TPJ involvement in the stimulus-driven reorientation of attention and discuss alternative explanations such as contextual updating.

How attention changes in response to incentives

Although the performance of simple cognitive tasks can be enhanced if an incentive is provided, the mechanisms enabling such motivational control are not known. This study sought to uncover how mechanisms of attention and readiness are altered by reward-associated incentive stimuli. We measured EEG/ERP activity as human adults viewed a high- or low-incentive cue, experienced a short preparation interval, and then performed a simple visual search task to gain the predicted reward. Search performance was faster with high versus low incentives, and this was accompanied by distinct incentive-related EEG/ERP patterns at each phase of the task (incentive, preparation, and search). First, and most surprisingly, attention to high but not low incentive cues was actively suppressed, as indexed by a PD component in response to the incentive display. During the subsequent preparation interval, neural oscillations in the alpha frequency range were reduced after high-incentive cues, indicating heightened visual readiness. Finally, attentional orienting to the target in the search array was deployed with relatively little effort on high-incentive trials, as indexed by a reduced N2pc component. These results reveal the chain of events by which the brains executive control mechanisms respond to incentives by altering the operation of multiple processing systems to produce optimal performance.

How the Brain Prevents and Terminates Shifts of Attention

Much is known about the mechanisms by which attention is focused to facilitate perception, but little is known about the suppressive mechanisms that are used to prevent the brain from orienting to salient but irrelevant information or to terminate an episode of attention after perception of the attended object is complete. In this chapter, we review recent advances in understanding these aspects of attentional control by using the Pd component of the event-related potential waveform, a neural index of attentional suppression. These studies suggest that the active suppression mechanism indexed by the Pd component is used to prevent attention from being directed to salient distractors and terminates attention after perception is complete or after attention has been oriented to an inappropriate object.

Hyperfocusing of Attention on Goal-Related Information in Schizophrenia: Evidence From Electrophysiology.

Schizophrenia clearly involves impairments of attention, but the precise nature of these impairments has been difficult to determine. One possibility is that the deficit in attention is a secondary consequence of a deficit in goal maintenance. However, recent research suggests that people with schizophrenia (PSZ) actually focus attention more strongly on objects containing goal-relevant features. To test these competing hypotheses, we recorded event-related potentials (ERPs) from PSZ (N = 20) and healthy control subjects (HCS; N = 20) while they looked for a particular target color at fixation and tried to ignore lateral distractors that sometimes matched the target color (target-color distractors). Goal maintenance was made trivially easy by the continual presentation of a goal reminder. We found that HCS were able to successfully suppress target-color distractors (leading to a distractor positivity ERP component), whereas PSZ focused attention on these items (leading to an N2-posterior-contralateral ERP component). This suggests that, when maintaining a task set, PSZ engage in aberrant focusing of attention, or hyperfocusing, on goal-relevant features.