Distractor Color Research Articles

The neural basis of swap errors in working memory

When making decisions in a cluttered world, humans and other animals often have to hold multiple items in memory at once-such as the different items on a shopping list. Psychophysical experiments in humans and other animals have shown remembered stimuli can sometimes become confused, with participants reporting chimeric stimuli composed of features from different stimuli. In particular, subjects will often make "swap errors" where they misattribute a feature from one object as belonging to another object. While swap errors have been described behaviorally and theoretical explanations have been proposed, their neural mechanisms are unknown. Here, we elucidate these neural mechanisms by analyzing neural population recordings from monkeys performing two multistimulus working memory tasks. In these tasks, monkeys were cued to report the color of an item that either was previously shown at a corresponding location or will be shown at the corresponding location. Animals made swap errors in both tasks. In the neural data, we find evidence that the neural correlates of swap errors emerged when correctly remembered information is selected from working memory. This led to a representation of the distractor color as if it were the target color, underlying the eventual swap error. We did not find consistent evidence that swap errors arose from misinterpretation of the cue or errors during encoding or storage in working memory. These results provide evidence that swap errors emerge during selection of correctly remembered information from working memory, and highlight this selection as a crucial-yet surprisingly brittle-neural process.

Target-distractor similarity predicts visual search efficiency but only for highly similar features.

A major constraining factor for attentional selection is the similarity between targets and distractors. When similarity is low, target items can be identified quickly and efficiently, whereas high similarity can incur large costs on processing speed. Models of visual search contrast a fast, efficient parallel stage with a slow serial processing stage where search times are strongly modulated by the number of distractors in the display. In particular, recent work has argued that the magnitude of search slopes should be inversely proportional to target-distractor similarity. Here, we assessed the relationship between target-distractor similarity and search slopes. In our visual search tasks, participants detected an oddball color target among distractors (Experiments 1 & 2) or discriminated the direction of a triangle in the oddball color (Experiment 3). We systematically varied the similarity between target and distractor colors (along a circular CIELAB color wheel) and the number of distractors in the search array, finding logarithmic search slopes that were inversely proportional to the number of items in the array. Surprisingly, we also found that searches were highly efficient (i.e., near-zero slopes) for targets and distractors that were extremely similar (≤20° in color space). These findings indicate that visual search is systematically influenced by target-distractor similarity across different processing stages. Importantly, we found that search can be highly efficient and entirely unaffected by the number of distractors despite high perceptual similarity, in contrast to the general assumption that high similarity must lead to slow and serial search behavior.

Similar Quality of Visual Working Memory Representations between Negative and Positive Attentional Templates.

Visual working memory (VWM) plays an important role during visual search, with some theories suggesting an equivalence between working memory representations and guidance from attentional templates. However, recent work has shown that participants can also use 'negative templates', the foreknowledge of distractor-features stored in VWM, to guide attention away from distractors during visual search. These negative templates must also be represented in working memory, but the question remains whether the quality of the working memory representations underlying negative and positive templates are similar, in spite of their opposite impacts on attention. In this study, participants (N = 33) engaged in a visual search task for a shape-defined target after receiving a positive cue (target color), negative cue (distractor color) or neutral cue (non-informative). In 20% of the trials, a color-wheel probe was presented instead of a search array to measure the quality of the cue representation stored in VWM. Our results revealed that participants were more likely to guess in response to neutral cues than negative cues. Yet, the comparison between positive and negative cues showed no significant differences. However, we found no difference in memory precision for the three cue types. More interestingly, the more the VWM quality is boosted by the negative cue, the greater the ability to guide attention away from distractors. Such a pattern of results might map to recent evidence of between-individuals differences in utilization of negative cues. These findings highlight the distinction between attentional templates and simple maintenance in working memory.

Prospective Distractor Information Reduces Reward-Related Attentional Capture.

Motivationally salient stimuli, such as those associated with reward, can automatically gain attentional prioritisation - even when individuals are motivated to ignore such stimuli. This 'attentional bias for reward' has often been interpreted as evidence for involuntary Pavlovian 'sign tracking' behaviour. The prioritisation of reward-signalling distractors may additionally reflect a drive to gain information about the state of the world, irrespective of the particular reward that is being signalled. In the current study we assessed whether forewarning participants on each trial as to the upcoming features of a distractor would reduce reward-related attentional capture. This manipulation reduces the information provided by the distractor, without affecting the magnitude of the signalled reward. Using eye tracking in Experiment 1, we found that reward-related attentional capture was virtually eliminated when participants were informed of the upcoming distractor colour (relative to the baseline condition when no information was provided). In Experiment 2, using a response-time version of the task, we again found a significant reduction in reward-related attentional capture when participants received information about the colour of an upcoming distractor, or information about the value of the upcoming reward. Finally, in Experiment 3 we assessed whether participants were using the pre-trial information to strategically inhibit attention to the upcoming distractor colour. The results of these experiments are discussed within the context of information-seeking accounts of reward-related attentional capture effects.

Proactive suppression is an implicit process that cannot be summoned on demand.

We examined whether proactive suppression can be applied on demand. A prompt cue indicated the to-be-ignored distractor color for each trial. Participants needed to use this cue to know which of two target shapes to respond to. To assess proactive suppression of the cued distractor color, we presented a probe letter recall task on a minority (25%) of the trials. A letter appeared inside each of the six shapes of the search array and participants recalled as many letters as they could. When the to-be-ignored color was fixed in Experiment 1, probe recall accuracy was lower for probe letters inside to-be-ignored-color distractors than target-color distractors, known as the probe suppression effect. However, when the prompted to-be-ignored color varied from trial to trial, the probe suppression effect disappeared, regardless of whether the prompt was a colored circle (Experiment 2) or a colored word (Experiment 3). Experiment 4 tested the search and destroy hypothesis by shortening the search display duration from 200 to 50 ms. No capture effect by the to-be-ignored color was evident, suggesting that participants did not first search for the to-be-ignored color, prior to suppressing it. We conclude that when rejection of a distractor color is required on demand, one cannot accomplish such suppression proactively but instead must deal with the distractor reactively, incurring a large cost in performance. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Distinct mechanisms of attentional suppression: exploration of trait factors underlying cued- and learned-suppression

Attention allows us to focus on relevant information while ignoring distractions. Effective suppression of distracting information is crucial for efficient visual search. Recent studies have developed two paradigms to investigate attentional suppression: cued-suppression which is based on top-down control, and learned-suppression which is based on selection history. While both types of suppression reportedly engage proactive control, it remains unclear whether they rely on shared mechanisms. This study aimed to determine the relationship between cued- and learned-suppression. In a within-subjects design, 54 participants performed a cued-suppression task where pre-cues indicated upcoming target or distractor colors, and a learned-suppression task where a salient color distractor was present or absent. No significant correlation emerged between performance in the two tasks, suggesting distinct suppression mechanisms. Cued-suppression correlated with visual working memory capacity, indicating reliance on explicit control. In contrast, learned-suppression correlated with everyday distractibility, suggesting implicit control based on regularities. These results provide evidence for heterogeneous proactive control mechanisms underlying cued- and learned-suppression. While both engage inhibition, cued-suppression relies on deliberate top-down control modulated by working memory, whereas learned-suppression involves implicit suppression shaped by selection history and distractibility traits.

Suppression on the basis of template for rejection is reactive: Evidence from human electrophysiology.

According to most theories of attention, the selection of task-relevant visual information can be enhanced by holding them in visual working memory (VWM). However, there has been a long-standing debate concerning whether similar optimization can also be achieved for task-irrelevant information, known as a "template for rejection". The present study aimed to explore this issue by examining the consequence of cue distractors before visual search tasks. For this endeavor, we manipulated the display heterogeneity by using two distractor conditions, salient and non-salient, to explore the extent to which holding the distractor color in VWM might affect attentional selection. We measured the reaction times of participants while their EEG activity was recorded. The results showed that WM-matched distractors did not improve reaction times but rather slowed them down in both tasks. Event-related potential (ERP) results showed that the display heterogeneity had no modulatory effect on the degree of distractor suppression. Even in the salient distractor condition, the WM-matched distractor received no greater suppression. Furthermore, the WM-matched distractor but not the neutral distractor elicited an N2pc before the PD in salient distractor conditions. This suggests that the template for rejection operates reactively since suppression occurs after extra attentional processes to the distractor. Moreover, the presence of WM-matched distractors led to a reduction of P3b, indicating a competition between target processing and WM-matched distractor rejection. Our findings provide insights into the mechanisms underlying the optimization of attentional selection, and have implications for future studies aimed at understanding the role of VWM in cognition.

Investigating the role of spatial filtering on distractor suppression.

In recent years, evidence has accumulated towards a distractor suppression mechanism that enables efficient selection of targets in a visual search task. According to these findings, the search for a target is faster in the presence of a salient distractor in a display among homogenous distractors as opposed to its absence. Studies have also shown that distractor suppression not only operates on the feature level but can also be spatially guided. The motivation of the current study was to examine if spatially guided distractor suppression can be goal-driven. We tested this across four experiments. In Experiment 1A, the task was to search for a shape target (e.g., a circle) and discriminate the orientation of the line within it. In some trials, a salient color distractor was presented in the display while participants were told that it appeared in one of the two locations on the horizontal axis (or the vertical axis, counterbalanced across participants). We expected enhanced distractor suppression when the salient distractor appeared within this "spatial filter" but did not find it since the target was also presented at the filtered locations. Experiment 1B replicated Experiment 1A, except that the target was always presented outside the filter; filtering enhanced search performance. In Experiment 2 even when the filter contained the salient distractor in only 65% of the filtered trials, filtering benefited search performance. In Experiment 3, the filter changed on every trial and did not benefit suppression.

Evidence that proactive distractor suppression does not require attentional resources.

Does the suppression of irrelevant visual features require attentional resources? McDonald et al. (2023, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 30, 224-234) proposed that suppression processes are unavailable while a person is busy performing another task. They reported the absence of the PD (believed to index suppression) when two tasks were presented close together in time. We looked for converging evidence using established behavior measures of suppression. Following McDonald et al., our participants performed a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) task followed by a search task. For the RSVP task, participants determined whether the target digit 4 or 6 appeared within a string of other digits. The search display appeared at a lag of 2 or 8 digits after the RSVP target. Participants searched for a yellow target circle amongst nine background circles, which included a uniquely colored distractor for some trials. The main question was whether distractor suppression would occur at Lag 2, while attentional resources were still processing the RSVP target. Suppression was assessed using the capture-probe paradigm. On 30% of trials, probe letters appeared inside the colored circles and participants reported those letters. Probe recall accuracy was lower at locations with distractor colors than those with neutral colors (the baseline), suggesting proactive suppression. Critically, this difference in probe recall accuracy was similar at Lag 2 and Lag 8, suggesting that the ability to proactively suppress distractors remains intact while dual-tasking. We argue that although reactive suppression likely requires attentional resources, proactive suppression-an implicit process-does not.

Continuous action with a neurobiologically inspired computational approach reveals the dynamics of selection history.

Everyday perception-action interaction often requires selection of a single goal from multiple possibilities. According to a recent framework of attentional control, object selection is guided not only by the well-established factors of perceptual salience and current goals but also by selection history. Yet, underlying mechanisms linking selection history and visually-guided actions are poorly understood. To examine such interplay and disentangle the impact of target and distractor history on action selection, we employed a priming-of-popout (PoP) paradigm combined with continuous tracking of reaching movements and computational modeling. Participants reached an odd-colored target among homogeneous distractors while we systematically manipulated the sequence of target and distractor colors from one trial to the next. We observed that current reach movements were significantly influenced by the interaction between attraction by the prior target feature and repulsion by the prior distractor feature. With principal component regression, we found that inhibition led by prior distractors influenced reach target selection earlier than facilitation led by the prior target. In parallel, our newly developed computational model validated that current reach target selection can be explained best by the mechanism postulating the preceded impact of previous distractors followed by a previous target. Such converging empirical and computational evidence suggests that the prior selection history triggers a dynamic interplay between target facilitation and distractor inhibition to guide goal-directed action successfully. This, in turn, highlights the necessity of an explicitly integrated approach to determine how visual attentional selection links with adaptive actions in a complex environment.

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.

Feature-based attention warps the perception of visual features

Selective attention improves sensory processing of relevant information but can also impact the quality of perception. For example, attention increases visual discrimination performance and at the same time boosts apparent stimulus contrast of attended relative to unattended stimuli. Can attention also lead to perceptual distortions of visual representations? Optimal tuning accounts of attention suggest that processing is biased towards “off-tuned” features to maximize the signal-to-noise ratio in favor of the target, especially when targets and distractors are confusable. Here, we tested whether such tuning gives rise to phenomenological changes of visual features. We instructed participants to select a color among other colors in a visual search display and subsequently asked them to judge the appearance of the target color in a 2-alternative forced choice task. Participants consistently judged the target color to appear more dissimilar from the distractor color in feature space. Critically, the magnitude of these perceptual biases varied systematically with the similarity between target and distractor colors during search, indicating that attentional tuning quickly adapts to current task demands. In control experiments we rule out possible non-attentional explanations such as color contrast or memory effects. Overall, our results demonstrate that selective attention warps the representational geometry of color space, resulting in profound perceptual changes across large swaths of feature space. Broadly, these results indicate that efficient attentional selection can come at a perceptual cost by distorting our sensory experience.

Assessing recoding accounts of negative attentional templates using behavior and eye tracking.

Can we use attentional control to ignore known distractor features? Providing cues before a visual search trial about an upcoming distractor color (negative cue) can lead to reaction time benefits compared with no cue trials. This suggests top-down control may use negative templates to actively suppress distractor features, a notion that challenges the mechanisms of top-down control provided in many theories of attention. However, there is currently mixed support for this mechanism in the literature. Alternative explanations have been proposed, which do not require suppression within top-down control but instead involve recoding the negative cue into a positive template based on color or spatial layouts. In three experiments, we contrasted the predictions of active suppression and the recoding strategies. Across experiments, we found consistent evidence against a color recoding account. We also found evidence of accuracy, reaction time, and eye movement benefits when location recoding was not possible. These results suggest that prior benefits from negative cues cannot be explained exclusively by spatial or color recoding. The results indicate that active suppression likely plays a role in the attentional benefits following negative cues. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

On preventing capture: Does greater salience cause greater suppression?

It has been proposed that salient objects have high potential to disrupt target performance, and so people learn to proactively suppress them, thereby preventing these salient distractors from capturing attention in the future. Consistent with this hypothesis, Gaspar et al. (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(13), 3693-3698, 2016) reported that the PD (believed to index suppression) was larger for high-salient color distractors than for low-salient color distractors. The present study looked for converging evidence that salience triggers suppression using established behavior measures of suppression. Following Gaspar et al., our participants searched for a yellow target circle among nine background circles, which sometimes included one circle with a unique color. The distractor was either high or low in salience with respect to the background circles. The question was whether the high-salient color would be proactively suppressed more strongly than the low-salient color. This was assessed using the capture-probe paradigm. On 33% of trials, probe letters appeared inside colored circles and participants were to report those letters. If high-salient colors are more strongly suppressed, then probe recall accuracy should be lower at locations with the high-salient color than those with the low-salient color. Experiment 1found no such effect. A similar finding was observed in Experiment 2after addressing possible floor effects. These findings suggest that proactive suppression is not caused by salience. We propose that the PD reflects not only proactive suppression but also reactive suppression.

Inversion of pop-out for a distracting feature dimension in monkey visual cortex

During visual search, it is important to reduce the interference of distracting objects in the scene. The neuronal responses elicited by the search target stimulus are typically enhanced. However, it is equally important to suppress the representations of distracting stimuli, especially if they are salient and capture attention. We trained monkeys to make an eye movement to a unique "pop-out" shape stimulus among an array of distracting stimuli. One of these distractors had a salient color that varied across trials and differed from the color of the other stimuli, causing it to also pop-out. The monkeys were able to select the pop-out shape target with high accuracy and actively avoided the pop-out color distractor. This behavioral pattern was reflected in the activity of neurons in area V4. Responses to the shape targets were enhanced, while the activity evoked by the pop-out color distractor was only briefly enhanced, directly followed by a sustained period of pronounced suppression. These behavioral and neuronal results demonstrate a cortical selection mechanism that rapidly inverts a pop-out signal to "pop-in" for an entire feature dimension thereby facilitating goal-directed visual search in the presence of salient distractors.

Attentional capture is modulated by stimulus saliency in visual search as evidenced by event-related potentials and alpha oscillations

This study used a typical four-item search display to investigate top-down control over attentional capture in an additional singleton paradigm. By manipulating target and distractor color and shape, stimulus saliency relative to the remaining items was systematically varied. One group of participants discriminated the side of a dot within a salient orange target (ST group) presented with green circles (fillers) and a green diamond distractor. A second group discriminated the side of the dot within a green diamond target presented with green circle fillers and a salient orange square distractor (SD group). Results showed faster reaction times and a shorter latency of the N2pc component in the event-related potential (ERP) to the more salient targets in the ST group. Both salient and less salient distractors elicited Pd components of equal amplitude. Behaviorally, no task interference was observed with the less salient distractor, indicating the prevention of attentional capture. However, reaction times were slower in the presence of the salient distractor, which conflicts with the hypothesis that the Pd reflects proactive distractor suppression. Contrary to recent proposals that elicitation of the Pd requires competitive interactions with a target, we found a greater Pd amplitude when the distractor was presented alone. Alpha-band amplitudes decreased during target processing (event-related desynchronization), but no significant amplitude enhancement was observed at electrodes contralateral to distractors regardless of their saliency. The results demonstrate independent neural mechanisms for target and distractor processing and support the view that top-down guidance of attention can be offset (counteracted) by relative stimulus saliency.

Reconstructing attended and unattended colors from human scalp electroencephalography

Human electroencephalography (EEG) studies have shown that attention enhances relevant over irrelevant visual features (e.g., Andersen et al., 2013). Such amplitude modulations have been a major focus of feature-based attention research, alongside recent studies showing that the spatial pattern of scalp-recorded EEG activity conveys critical information about different stimuli. To date, the majority of these studies have focused on decoding visual-spatial features (location, orientation). Here, we test whether color—a non-spatial feature—can be reconstructed from the scalp activity pattern using steady-state visual evoked potentials (SSVEPs) and inverted encoding modeling (IEM). Furthermore, we test how these color reconstructions vary across different types of feature-based attention tasks. Participants (N=17) performed two color-based attention tasks: 1) a non-competitive task, in which they monitored a single array of colored dots to detect a brief interval of coherent motion; 2) a selective attention task in which participants focused on target-colored dots among distractors to detect a brief luminance decrease. In the selective task, the target and distractor colors were either distinct (180° away on a CIELab colorwheel) or similar (63° away). Stimuli flickered at different frequencies to elicit separable SSVEPs that we used to generate color-selective response profiles based on their spatially distributed patterns. Across both tasks, we found that information about the target and distractor colors was reliably recovered from single trials with IEMs, confirming the usefulness of this technique for investigating feature representations. Model-based reconstructions in the selective attention task were stronger for more distinct colors, suggesting that perceptually similar features might elicit less informative SSVEP signals due to greater overlap in the neural populations that encode them. Broadly, our results demonstrate that SSVEPs along with IEMs can be used to investigate non-spatial visual features that may not be as well represented as spatial information in event-related potentials or alpha-band signals.

Learned feature regularities enable suppression of spatially overlapping stimuli

Contemporary theories of attentional control state that information can be prioritized based on selection history. Even though theories agree that selection history can impact representations of spatial location, which in turn helps guide attention, there remains disagreement on whether nonspatial features (e.g., color) are modulated in a similar way. While previous work has demonstrated color suppression using visual search tasks, it is possible that the location corresponding to the distractor was suppressed, consistent with a spatial mechanism of suppression. Here, we sought to rule out this possibility by testing whether similar suppression of a learned distractor color can occur for spatially overlapping visual stimuli. On a given trial, two spatially superimposed stimuli (line arrays) were tilted either left or right of vertical and presented in one of four distinct colors. Subjects performed a speeded report of the orientation of the “target” array with the most lines. Critically, the distractor array was regularly one color, and this high-probability color was never the color of the target array, which encouraged learned suppression. In two experiments, responses to the target array were fastest when the distractor array was in the high-probability color, suggesting participants suppressed the distractor color. Additionally, when regularities were removed, the high-probability distractor color continued to benefit speeded target identification for individual subjects (E1) but slowed target identification (E2) when presented in the target array. Together, these results indicate that learned suppression of feature-based regularities modulates target detection performance independent of spatial location and persists over time.

Is Statistical Learning of a Salient Distractor's Color Implicit, Inflexible and Distinct From Inter-Trial Priming?

Being able to overcome distraction by salient distractors is critical in order to allocate our attention efficiently. Previous research showed that observers can learn to ignore salient distractors endowed with some regularity, such as a high-probability location or feature - a phenomenon known as distractor statistical learning. Unlike goal-directed attentional guidance, the bias induced by statistical learning is thought to be implicit, long-lasting and inflexible. We tested these claims with regard to statistical learning of distractor color in a high-power (N = 160) pre-registered experiment. Participants searched for a known-shape singleton target and a color singleton distractor, when present, appeared most often in one color during the learning phase, but equally often in all possible colors during the extinction phase. We used a sensitive measure of participants' awareness of the probability manipulation. The awareness test was administered after the extinction phase for one group, and after the leaning phase for another group - which was informed that the probability imbalance would be discontinued in the upcoming extinction phase. Participants learned to suppress the high-probability distractor color very fast, an effect partly due to intertrial priming. Crucially, there was only little evidence that the bias survived during extinction. Awareness of the manipulation was associated with reduced color suppression, suggesting that the bias was implicit. Finally, results showed that the awareness test was more sensitive when administered early vs. late. We conclude that learnt color suppression is an implicit bias that emerges and decays rapidly, and discuss the methodological implications of our findings.

Distractor ignoring is as effective as target enhancement when incidentally learned but not when explicitly cued.

Explicit knowledge about upcoming target or distractor features can increase performance in tasks like visual search. However, explicit distractor cues generally result in smaller performance benefits than target cues, suggesting that suppressing irrelevant information is less effective than enhancing relevant information. Is this asymmetry a general principle of feature-based attention? Across four experiments (N = 75 each) we compared the efficiency of target selection and distractor ignoring through either incidental experience or explicit instructions. Participants searched for an orientation-defined target amidst seven distractors-three in the target color and four in another color. In Experiment 1, either targets (Exp. 1a) or distractors (Exp. 1b) were presented more often in a specific color than other possible search colors. Response times showed comparable benefits of learned attention towards (Exp. 1a) and away from (Exp. 1b) the frequent color, suggesting that learned target selection and distractor ignoring can be equally effective. In Experiment 2, participants completed a nearly identical task, only with explicit cues to the target (Exp. 2a) or distractor color (Exp. 2b), inducing voluntary attention. Both target and distractor cues were beneficial for search performance, but distractor cues much less so than target cues, consistent with previous results. Cross-experiment analyses verified that the relative inefficiency of distractor ignoring versus target selection is a unique characteristic of voluntary attention that is not shared by incidentally learned attention, pointing to dissociable mechanisms of voluntary and learned attention to support distractor ignoring.