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 (PD) 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.
AndersenS. K.MüllerM. 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
2.
AwhE.BartonB.VogelE. 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
3.
BartschM. V.DonohueS. E.StrumpfH.SchoenfeldM. A.HopfJ. 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
4.
BurgoyneA. P.EngleR. 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
5.
CowanN. (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
6.
DelormeA.MakeigS. (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
7.
DingY.MartinezA.QuZ.HillyardS. 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
8.
EimerM. (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
9.
EimerM.KissM. (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.
EngleR. W.KaneM. J.TuholskiS. 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 MiyakeA.ShahP. (Eds.), Models of working memory: Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control (pp. 102–134). Cambridge University Press.
11.
Feldmann-WüstefeldT.VogelE. 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.
FolkC. L.LeberA. B.EgethH. 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.
FolkC. L.RemingtonR. (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.
FolkC. L.RemingtonR. W.JohnstonJ. 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.
ForsbergA.GuitardD.GreeneN. R.Naveh-BenjaminM.CowanN. (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.
ForschackN.AndersenS. K.MüllerM. 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.
ForschackN.GundlachC.HillyardS.MüllerM. 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.
FukudaK.VogelE. K. (2009). Human variation in overriding attentional capture. Journal of Neuroscience, 29(27), 8726–8733. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611398493
19.
FukudaK.VogelE. K. (2011). Individual differences in recovery time from attentional capture. Psychological Science, 22(3), 361–368. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611398493
20.
FukudaK.VogelE. K.MayrU.AwhE. (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.
GasparJ. M.ChristieG. J.PrimeD. J.JolicœurP.McDonaldJ. 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.
GasparJ. M.McDonaldJ. 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.
GaspelinN.LamyD.EgethH. E.LiesefeldH. R.KerzelD.MandalA.van MoorselaarD. (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.
GaspelinN.LuckS. 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.
GaspelinN.LuckS. 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.
GazzaleyA.ClappW.KelleyJ.McEvoyK.KnightR. T.D’EspositoM. (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.
HarrisA. M.JacobyO.RemingtonR. W.TravisS. L.MattingleyJ. 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.
HasherL.LustigC.ZacksR. (2007). Inhibitory mechanisms and the control of attention. In ConwayA.JarroldC.KaneM. J.MiyakeA.TowseJ. N. (Eds.), Variation in working memory (pp. 227–249). Oxford University Press.
29.
HickeyC.Di LolloV.McDonaldJ. 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.
HickeyC.McDonaldJ. J.TheeuwesJ. (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.
HuL.DingY.QuZ. (2019). Perceptual learning induces active suppression of physically nonsalient shapes. Psychophysiology, 56(9), Article e13393. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.13393
32.
HuangW.SuY.ZhenY.QuZ. (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.
IpataA. E.GeeA. L.GottliebJ.BisleyJ. W.GoldbergM. 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.
JannatiA.GasparJ. M.McDonaldJ. 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.
KaneM. J.BleckleyM. K.ConwayA. R.EngleR. 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.
LeblancÉ.PrimeD. J.JolicoeurP. (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.
LeonardC. J.BalestreriA.LuckS. 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-CalderonJ.LuckS. 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.
LuckS. J. (2014). An introduction to the event-related potential technique. MIT Press.
40.
LuckS. J.GaspelinN. (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
LuckS. J.HillyardS. 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.
LuckS. J.VogelE. K. (1997). The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions. Nature, 390(6657), 279–281. https://doi.org/10.1038/36846
44.
LuckS. J.VogelE. 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.
McNabF.KlingbergT. (2008). Prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia control access to working memory. Nature Neuroscience, 11(1), 103–107. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn2024
46.
PlebanekD. J.SloutskyV. M. (2019). Selective attention, filtering, and the development of working memory. Developmental Science, 22(1), Article e12727. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12727
SawakiR.GengJ. J.LuckS. 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.
SawakiR.LuckS. 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.
SuY.HuangW.YangN.YanK.DingY.QuZ. (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.
TayD.McDonaldJ. 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
VogelE. K.McColloughA. W.MachizawaM. 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.
ZantoT. P.GazzaleyA. (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.
