Abstract
A recent ERP study using a spatial cueing paradigm found that the physiological indices accompanying the orienting, shifting and allocation processes of attention, and the performance on the task in terms of speed and accuracy of responding on the other hand covaried (Talsma, Mulckhuyse, Slagter, & Theeuwes, 2007). However, the stimuli used in the former study possibly allowed for bottom-up capture of attention. Therefore the results could not unequivocally be attributed to a top-down attentional process. The present study is a follow-up of the Talsma et al. (2007) study and the stimuli design used in this study controlled for possible bottom-up effects. As a result, participants needed to spatially allocate attention in a top-down way. Indeed, in this study an Event-related Potential (ERP) component associated with the top-down allocation of attention was found; the N2-posterior-contralateral (N2pc). N2pc amplitudes were bigger in the fastest versus the slowest trials for the validly and non-informatively cued targets at posterior scalp sites. The present study replicated the Talsma et al. (2007) findings that the target-evoked N1 components were larger for the faster trials in the validly and non-informatively cued trials.
Highlights
The flow of information that continuously enters our system is enormous
When people anticipate certain stimuli to appear at a specific location, they can direct their attention to that location in a voluntary top-down way; thereby enhancing their perception of that stimulus at that specific location
The results of this study showed that motivation could improve behavioral performance in a Posner spatial cueing task
Summary
The flow of information that continuously enters our system is enormous. The human brain, capable of dealing with huge amounts of information, cannot process all this information to the highest level. In line with the former study, it was expected that response times would correlate with the early component N1 for the target evoked ERPs. A possible consequence of the new paradigm could be that it made the task more difficult for subjects because possible bottom-up capture of attention was controlled for and attention could not be drawn to the target location in an automatically guided way. A possible consequence of the new paradigm could be that it made the task more difficult for subjects because possible bottom-up capture of attention was controlled for and attention could not be drawn to the target location in an automatically guided way This could possibly reduce accuracy and slow response times in comparison to the Talsma et al (2007) study. It was expected that accuracy is highest for the validly cued trials, intermediate for the non-informatively cued, and lowest for the invalidly cued trials
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
