Ten simple rules to study distractor suppression

Wöstmann, Malte; Störmer, Viola S.; Obleser, Jonas; Addleman, Douglas A.; Andersen, Søren K.; Gaspelin, Nicholas; Geng, Joy J.; Luck, Steven J.; Noonan, MaryAnn P.; Slagter, Heleen A.; Theeuwes, Jan

doi:10.1016/j.pneurobio.2022.102269

Cited by 60 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 131 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These effects, evident in both drift rate and nondecision time, are consistent with the previous literature on attentional capture from a salient display item (Theeuwes, 2014;Yantis, 1996). A novel contribution from this analysis is that the effects of the target and distractor singletons were significant only within conjunction search (Figure 3), where target-distractor similarity may have limited the ability to focus on specific target features or suppress distractors (Geng et al, 2019;Leber & Egeth, 2006;Ruthruff & Gaspelin, 2018;Stilwell & Gaspelin, 2021;Theeuwes, 2014;Wöstmann et al, 2022). Whereas visual salience is a highly influential determinant of search performance (Theeuwes, 2013), the color singleton in this task was not associated with significant differences in feature search performance.…”

Section: Visual Search Performancesupporting

confidence: 87%

“…Whereas a salient target improves performance, salient distractor items often interfere with performance, by capturing attention that could otherwise be devoted to target identification (Theeuwes, 2014;Yantis, 1996). The interfering effects of a distractor can be suppressed, especially when targets are predictable, and when spatial filtering or other top-down strategies are available (Geng et al, 2019;Leber & Egeth, 2006;Ruthruff & Gaspelin, 2018;Stilwell & Gaspelin, 2021;Wöstmann et al, 2022). But suppression is less effective when distractors are either previously presented targets (Gaspelin et al, 2019) or occur with an abrupt onset (Adams et al, 2022).…”

Section: During Visual Searchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Age-related differences in frontoparietal activation for target and distractor singletons during visual search

Merenstein

Mullin

Madden

2023

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Age-related decline in visual search performance has been associated with different patterns of activation in frontoparietal regions using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), but whether these age-related effects represent specific influences of target and distractor processing is unclear. Therefore, we acquired event-related fMRI data from 68 healthy, communitydwelling adults ages 18-78 years, during both conjunction (T/F target among rotated Ts and Fs) and feature (T/F target among Os) search. Some displays contained a color singleton that could correspond to either the target or a distractor. A diffusion decision analysis indicated age-related increases in sensorimotor response time across all task conditions, but an age-related decrease in the rate of evidence accumulation (drift rate) was specific to conjunction search. Moreover, the color singleton facilitated search performance when occurring as a target and disrupted performance when occurring as a distractor, but only during conjunction search, and these effects were independent of age. The fMRI data indicated that decreased search efficiency for conjunction relative to feature search was evident as widespread frontoparietal activation.Activation within the left insula mediated the age-related decrease in drift rate for conjunction search, whereas this relation in the FEF and parietal cortex was significant only for individuals younger than 30 or 44 years, respectively. Finally, distractor singletons were associated with significant parietal activation, whereas target singletons were associated with significant frontoparietal deactivation, and this latter effect increased with adult age. Age-related differences in frontoparietal activation therefore reflect both the overall efficiency of search and the enhancement from salient targets.

show abstract

Section: Visual Search Performancesupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: During Visual Searchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Age-related differences in frontoparietal activation for target and distractor singletons during visual search

Merenstein

Mullin

Madden

2023

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Further experiments could also determine whether the Interrupter is enhanced in the BROAD condition or suppressed in the FOCAL condition; as designed, our paradigm cannot distinguish between these explanations, as we did not include baseline conditions such as establishing the response of a guaranteed (always expected) Interrupter stimulus. We know that when the listener focuses on the Target (FOCAL condition) and either an Early or Late Interrupter plays, performance is the same as in No Interrupter trials, indicating a negligible behavioral impact of the Interrupter ( Wöstmann et al, 2022 ). Investigation into whether our paradigm elicits target enhancement or distractor suppression will improve our understanding of the nature of the executive function in ADHD: might it be a deficit in filtering unwanted information or in amplifying to-be-attended information?…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Top-down auditory attention modulates neural responses more strongly in neurotypical than ADHD young adults

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…To distinguish whether motivation by reward facilitated target processing or aided with distractor suppression (Wöstmann et al, 2022), we analyzed saccadic deviation as an index of suppression (Fig. 7).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Motivation by reward jointly improves speed and accuracy, whereas task-relevance and meaningful images do not

Wolf

Lappe²

2022

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Visual selection is characterized by a trade-off between speed and accuracy. Speed or accuracy of the selection process can be affected by higher level factors—for example, expecting a reward, obtaining task-relevant information, or seeing an intrinsically relevant target. Recently, motivation by reward has been shown to simultaneously increase speed and accuracy, thus going beyond the speed–accuracy-trade-off. Here, we compared the motivating abilities of monetary reward, task-relevance, and image content to simultaneously increase speed and accuracy. We used a saccadic distraction task that required suppressing a distractor and selecting a target. Across different blocks successful target selection was followed either by (i) a monetary reward, (ii) obtaining task-relevant information, or (iii) seeing the face of a famous person. Each block additionally contained the same number of irrelevant trials lacking these consequences, and participants were informed about the upcoming trial type. We found that postsaccadic vision of a face affected neither speed nor accuracy, suggesting that image content does not affect visual selection via motivational mechanisms. Task relevance increased speed but decreased selection accuracy, an observation compatible with a classical speed–accuracy trade-off. Motivation by reward, however, simultaneously increased response speed and accuracy. Saccades in all conditions deviated away from the distractor, suggesting that the distractor was suppressed, and this deviation was strongest in the reward block. Drift-diffusion modelling revealed that task-relevance affected behavior by affecting decision thresholds, whereas motivation by reward additionally increased the rate of information uptake. The present findings thus show that the three consequences differ in their motivational abilities.

show abstract

Ten simple rules to study distractor suppression

Cited by 60 publications

References 131 publications

Age-related differences in frontoparietal activation for target and distractor singletons during visual search

Age-related differences in frontoparietal activation for target and distractor singletons during visual search

Top-down auditory attention modulates neural responses more strongly in neurotypical than ADHD young adults

Motivation by reward jointly improves speed and accuracy, whereas task-relevance and meaningful images do not

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About