Value-driven attentional capture is modulated by the contents of working memory: An EEG study

Abstract

Attention and working memory (WM) have previously been shown to interact closely when sensory information is being maintained. However, when non-sensory information is maintained in WM, the relationship between WM and sensory attention may be less strong. In the current study, we used electroencephalography to evaluate whether value-driven attentional capture (i.e., allocation of attention to a task-irrelevant feature previously associated with a reward) and its effects on either sensory or non-sensory WM performance might be greater than the effects of salient, non-reward-associated stimuli. In a training phase, 19 participants learned to associate a color with reward. Then, participants were presented with squares and encoded their locations into WM. Participants were instructed to convert the spatial locations either to another type of sensory representation or to an abstract, relational type of representation. During the WM delay period, task-irrelevant distractors, either previously-rewarded or non-rewarded, were presented, with a novel color distractor in the other hemifield. The results revealed lower alpha power and larger N2pc amplitude over posterior electrode sides contralateral to the previously rewarded color, compared to ipsilateral. These effects were mainly found during relational WM, compared to sensory WM, and only for the previously rewarded distractor color, compared to a previous non-rewarded target color or novel color. These effects were associated with modulations of WM performance. These results appear to reflect less capture of attention during maintenance of specific location information, and suggest that value-driven attentional capture can be mitigated as a function of the type of information maintained in WM.

Modulation of Peak Alpha Frequency Oscillations During Working Memory Is Greater in Females Than Males

“…As the name of the time period suggests, this period allows for analysis of PAF as it relates to the maintaining of information in working memory. The naming and definitions of these time periods of interest is in line with previous working memory research that utilizes EEG (e.g., Manza et al, 2014;Bae and Luck, 2018;Hinault et al, 2019; and see Roux and Uhlhaas, 2014).…”

“…Task-type trial order was pseudorandomized within each block. For further, detailed task methods, see Spatial Locations and Relations Task (Blacker et al, 2017;Hinault et al, 2019).…”

“…The length of this time window allowed for measurement of approximately four oscillatory cycles at the lowest frequency of interest here (8 Hz) -a number of cycles within the typically recommended range (Cohen, 2014). This Baseline period covers a pre-stimulus range of time similar to the baseline periods of other studies (e.g., Hinault et al, 2019). Maintenance was defined as the last 1,500 ms of the delay, prior to the presentation of test stimuli.…”

Dynamic Cognitive States Predict Individual Variability in Behavior and Modulate with EEG Functional Connectivity during Working Memory

“…We used a dataset from a previous study (10) in which a salient, distracting stimulus was presented during the delay period of a spatial working memory task (11,12). Overall, individual reaction times (RT) varied greatly in all participants within a single session.…”

“…Reaction time is highly variable during a working memory 109 task. In this study, we analyzed the behavioral and EEG 110 data of 16 participants from a previously published study 111 in our laboratory (7). The task involved remembering 112 one of two different types of spatial information (spatial 113 location or relation between items) across a delay period.…”