Susceptibility to Attentional Capture by Target-Matching Distractors Predicts High Visual Working Memory Capacity

Abstract

Recent event-related potential (ERP) studies showed that individuals with low visual working memory (VWM) capacity are more susceptible to salience-driven attentional capture than high-capacity individuals are, with the latter being able to proactively suppress salient but irrelevant distractors. However, it remains unclear whether and how contingent attentional capture by distractors that possess a task-relevant (target) feature is related to VWM capacity. Here, we adopted a central focused-attention task that contained peripheral target-matching distractors to investigate this issue (N = 51 adults). Surprisingly, we revealed that target-matching distractors elicited both a larger N2-posterior-contralateral (N2pc) and a larger post-N2pc distractor positivity (P_D) component in high-capacity individuals than in low-capacity ones, meaning that high-capacity individuals are less able to ignore such distractors initially, though they could call on a stronger reactive suppression mechanism afterward. These findings illustrate that high-capacity individuals are more (rather than less or equally) susceptible to contingent attention capture compared with low-capacity ones.

Keywords

visual working memory capacity individual difference attentional capture distractor suppression N2pc event-related potential

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Andersen

S. K.

Müller

M. M.

(2010). Behavioral performance follows the time course of neural facilitation and suppression during cued shifts of feature-selective attention. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 107(31), 13878–13882. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1002436107

Awh

Barton

Vogel

E. K.

(2007). Visual working memory represents a fixed number of items regardless of complexity. Psychological Science, 18(7), 622–628. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01949.x

Bartsch

M. V.

Donohue

S. E.

Strumpf

Schoenfeld

M. A.

Hopf

J. M.

(2018). Enhanced spatial focusing increases feature-based selection in unattended locations. Scientific Reports, 8(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-34424-5

Burgoyne

A. P.

Engle

R. W.

(2020). Attention control: A cornerstone of higher-order cognition. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29(6), 624–630. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721420969371

Cowan

(2000). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(1), 87–114. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X01003922

Delorme

Makeig

(2004). EEGLAB: An open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 134(1), 9–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2003.10.009

Ding

Martinez

Hillyard

S. A.

(2014). Earliest stages of visual cortical processing are not modified by attentional load. Human Brain Mapping, 35(7), 3008–3024. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.22381

Eimer

(1996). The N2pc component as an indicator of attentional selectivity. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 99(3), 225–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/0013-4694(96)95711-9

Eimer

Kiss

(2008). Involuntary attentional capture is determined by task set: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(8), 1423–1433. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2008.20099

10.

Engle

R. W.

Kane

M. J.

Tuholski

S. W.

(1999). Individual differences in working memory capacity and what they tell us about controlled attention, general fluid intelligence, and functions of the prefrontal cortex. In Miyake

Shah

(Eds.), Models of working memory: Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control (pp. 102–134). Cambridge University Press.

11.

Feldmann-Wüstefeld

Vogel

E. K.

(2019). Neural evidence for the contribution of active suppression during working memory filtering. Cerebral Cortex, 29(2), 529–543. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhx336

12.

Folk

C. L.

Leber

A. B.

Egeth

H. E.

(2002). Made you blink! Contingent attentional capture produces a spatial blink. Perception and Psychophysics, 64(5), 741–753. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03194741

13.

Folk

C. L.

Remington

(1998). Selectivity in distraction by irrelevant featural singletons: Evidence for two forms of attentional capture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24(3), 847–858. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.24.3.847

14.

Folk

C. L.

Remington

R. W.

Johnston

J. C.

(1992). Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18(4), 1030–1044. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.18.4.1030

15.

Forsberg

Guitard

Greene

N. R.

Naveh-Benjamin

Cowan

(2022). The proportion of working memory items recoverable from long-term memory remains fixed despite adult aging. Psychology and Aging, 37(7), 777–786. https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000703

16.

Forschack

Andersen

S. K.

Müller

M. M.

(2017). Global enhancement but local suppression in feature-based attention. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 29(4), 619–627. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_01075

17.

Forschack

Gundlach

Hillyard

Müller

M. M.

(2022). Electrophysiological evidence for target facilitation without distractor suppression in two-stimulus search displays. Cerebral Cortex, 32(17), 3816–3828. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhab450

18.

Fukuda

Vogel

E. K.

(2009). Human variation in overriding attentional capture. Journal of Neuroscience, 29(27), 8726–8733. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611398493

19.

Fukuda

Vogel

E. K.

(2011). Individual differences in recovery time from attentional capture. Psychological Science, 22(3), 361–368. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611398493

20.

Fukuda

Vogel

E. K.

Mayr

Awh

(2010). Quantity, not quality: The relationship between fluid intelligence and working memory capacity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 673–679. https://doi.org/10.3758/17.5.673

21.

Gaspar

J. M.

Christie

G. J.

Prime

D. J.

Jolicœur

McDonald

J. J.

(2016). Inability to suppress salient distractors predicts low visual working memory capacity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 113(13), 3693–3698. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1523471113

22.

Gaspar

J. M.

McDonald

J. J.

(2014). Suppression of salient objects prevents distraction in visual search. Journal of Neuroscience, 34(16), 5658–5666. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4161-13.2014

23.

Gaspelin

Lamy

Egeth

H. E.

Liesefeld

H. R.

Kerzel

Mandal

van Moorselaar

(2023). The distractor positivity component and the inhibition of distracting stimuli. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 35(11), 1693–1715. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_02051

24.

Gaspelin

Luck

S. J.

(2018). The role of inhibition in avoiding distraction by salient stimuli. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 22(1), 79–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2017.11.001

25.

Gaspelin

Luck

S. J.

(2019). Inhibition as a potential resolution to the attentional capture debate. Current Opinion in Psychology, 29, 12–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.10.013

26.

Gazzaley

Clapp

Kelley

McEvoy

Knight

R. T.

D’Esposito

(2008). Age-related top-down suppression deficit in the early stages of cortical visual memory processing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 105(35), 13122–13126. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0806074105

27.

Harris

A. M.

Jacoby

Remington

R. W.

Travis

S. L.

Mattingley

J. B.

(2019). Taking a closer look at visual search: Just how feature-agnostic is singleton detection mode? Attention. Perception, & Psychophysics, 81, 654–665. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-018-01642-y

28.

Hasher

Lustig

Zacks

(2007). Inhibitory mechanisms and the control of attention. In Conway

Jarrold

Kane

M. J.

Miyake

Towse

J. N.

(Eds.), Variation in working memory (pp. 227–249). Oxford University Press.

29.

Hickey

Di Lollo

McDonald

J. J.

(2009). Electrophysiological indices of target and distractor processing in visual search. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 21(4), 760–775. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2009.21039

30.

Hickey

McDonald

J. J.

Theeuwes

(2006). Electrophysiological evidence of the capture of visual attention. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18(4), 604–613. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2006.18.4.604

31.

Ding

(2019). Perceptual learning induces active suppression of physically nonsalient shapes. Psychophysiology, 56(9), Article e13393. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.13393

32.

Huang

Zhen

(2016). The role of top-down spatial attention in contingent attentional capture. Psychophysiology, 53(5), 650–662. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12615

33.

Ipata

A. E.

Gee

A. L.

Gottlieb

Bisley

J. W.

Goldberg

M. E.

(2006). LIP responses to a popout stimulus are reduced if it is overtly ignored. Nature Neuroscience, 9(8), 1071–1076. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn1734

34.

Jannati

Gaspar

J. M.

McDonald

J. J.

(2013). Tracking target and distractor processing in fixed-feature visual search: Evidence from human electrophysiology. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39(6), 1713–1730. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032251

35.

Kane

M. J.

Bleckley

M. K.

Conway

A. R.

Engle

R. W.

(2001). A controlled-attention view of working-memory capacity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130(2), 169–183. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.130.2.169

36.

Leblanc

É.

Prime

D. J.

Jolicoeur

. (2008). Tracking the location of visuospatial attention in a contingent capture paradigm. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(4), 657–671. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2008.20051

37.

Leonard

C. J.

Balestreri

Luck

S. J.

(2015). Interactions between space-based and feature-based attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 41(1), 11–16. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000011

38.

Lopez-Calderon

Luck

S. J.

(2014). ERPLAB: An open-source toolbox for the analysis of event-related potentials. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, Article 213. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00213

39.

Luck

S. J.

(2014). An introduction to the event-related potential technique. MIT Press.

40.

Luck

S. J.

Gaspelin

(2017). How to get statistically significant effects in any ERP experiment (and why you shouldn’t). Psychophysiology, 54, 146–157. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12639

41.

Luck

S. J.

Gaspelin

Folk

C. L.

Remington

R. W.

Theeuwes

(2021). Progress toward resolving the attentional capture debate. Visual Cognition, 29(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2020.1848949

42.

Luck

S. J.

Hillyard

S. A.

(1994). Spatial filtering during visual search: Evidence from human electrophysiology. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20(5), 1000–1014. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.20.5.1000

43.

Luck

S. J.

Vogel

E. K.

(1997). The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions. Nature, 390(6657), 279–281. https://doi.org/10.1038/36846

44.

Luck

S. J.

Vogel

E. K.

(2013). Visual working memory capacity: From psychophysics and neurobiology to individual differences. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17(8), 391–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2013.06.006

45.

McNab

Klingberg

(2008). Prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia control access to working memory. Nature Neuroscience, 11(1), 103–107. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn2024

46.

Plebanek

D. J.

Sloutsky

V. M.

(2019). Selective attention, filtering, and the development of working memory. Developmental Science, 22(1), Article e12727. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12727

47.

Hillyard

S. A.

Ding

(2017). Perceptual learning induces persistent attentional capture by nonsalient shapes. Cerebral Cortex, 27(2), 1512–1523. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhv342

48.

Sawaki

Geng

J. J.

Luck

S. J.

(2012). A common neural mechanism for preventing and terminating the allocation of attention. Journal of Neuroscience, 32, 10725–10736. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1864-12.2012

49.

Sawaki

Luck

S. J.

(2010). Capture versus suppression of attention by salient singletons: Electrophysiological evidence for an automatic attend-to-me signal. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72(6), 1455–1470. https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.72.6.1455

50.

Huang

Yang

Yan

Ding

(2020). Attentional capture by a color singleton is stronger at spatially relevant than irrelevant locations: Evidence from an ERP study. Psychophysiology, 57(10), Article e13640. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.13640

51.

Tay

McDonald

J. J.

(2022). Attentional enhancement predicts individual differences in visual working memory under go/no-go search conditions. PLOS Biology, 20(11), Article e3001917. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3001917

52.

Theeuwes

(2010). Top-down and bottom-up control of visual selection. Acta Psychologica, 135(2), 77–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.02.006

53.

Vogel

E. K.

McCollough

A. W.

Machizawa

M. G.

(2005). Neural measures reveal individual differences in controlling access to working memory. Nature, 438(7067), 500–503. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04171

54.

Zanto

T. P.

Gazzaley

(2009). Neural suppression of irrelevant information underlies optimal working memory performance. Journal of Neuroscience, 29(10), 3059–3066. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4621-08.2009

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.78 MB