“…Indices of earlier electrophysiological signatures of attentional capture, such as the P1 and N1, have only been examined in one study using smokers and nonsmokers, and these components did not appear to differ across the groups (Littel & Franken, 2011), although these components did differ across categories of images presented (e.g., smoking vs. positive images, for the P1). These early components (e.g., the P1) can be highly sensitive to the physical properties of the stimuli (e.g., luminance, spatial frequency; Ellemberg, Hammarrenger, Lepore, Roy, & Guillemot, 2001;Hansen, Johnson, & Ellemberg, 2012;Tobimatsu & KuritaTashima, 1993), as well as to attention (Mangun, Buonocore, Girelli, & Jha, 1998), and as such, it is unclear whether the lack of early modulation observed in the Littel and Franken (2011) study was due to physical differences between the stimuli overwhelming any differences that may have been related to attention, or whether attention simply would not be drawn to the smoking-related stimuli at such an early time period. Critically, of the aforementioned addiction-related ERP studies, only Littel and Franken (2007) explicitly controlled for the low-level physical characteristics of the stimuli used, and as such, any attentional capture reported in the other studies may have been due at least in part to these physical differences (e.g., luminance), as well as to the complexity of the stimuli themselves, rather than to the addiction-related properties of the stimuli per se.…”