Stimuli in our sensory environment differ with respect to their physical salience but moreover may acquire motivational salience by association with reward. If we repeatedly observed that reward is available in the context of a particular cue but absent in the context of another cue the former typically attracts more attention than the latter. However, we also may encounter cues uncorrelated with reward. A cue with 50% reward contingency may induce an average reward expectancy but at the same time induces high reward uncertainty. In the current experiment we examined how both values, reward expectancy and uncertainty, affected overt attention. Two different colors were established as predictive cues for low reward and high reward respectively. A third color was followed by high reward on 50% of the trials and thus induced uncertainty. Colors then were introduced as distractors during search for a shape target, and we examined the relative potential of the color distractors to capture and hold the first fixation. We observed that capture frequency corresponded to reward expectancy while capture duration corresponded to uncertainty. The results may suggest that within trial reward expectancy is represented at an earlier time window than uncertainty.
Visual selective attention is known to be guided by stimulus-based (bottom-up) and goal-oriented (top-down) control mechanisms. Recent work has pointed out that selection history (i.e., the bias to prioritize items that have been previously attended) can result in a learning experience that also has a substantial impact on subsequent attention guidance. The present study examined to what extent goal-oriented top-down control mechanisms interact with an observer's individual selection history in guiding attention. Selection history was manipulated in a categorization task in a between-subjects design, where participants learned that either color or shape was the response-relevant dimension. The impact of this experience was assessed in a compound visual search task with an additional color distractor. Top-down preparation for each search trial was enabled by a pretrial task cue (Experiment 1) or a fixed, predictable trial sequence (Experiment 2). Reaction times and ERPs served as indicators of attention deployment. Results showed that attention was captured by the color distractor when participants had learned that color predicted the correct response in the categorization learning task, suggesting that a bias for predictive stimulus features had developed. The possibility to prepare for the search task reduced the bias, but could not entirely overrule this selection history effect. In Experiment 3, both tasks were performed in separate sessions, and the bias still persisted. These results indicate that selection history considerably shapes selective attention and continues to do so persistently even when the task allowed for high top-down control.
The human visual system can only process a fraction of the information present in a typical visual scene, and selection is historically framed as the outcome of bottom–up and top–down control processes. In this study, we evaluated how a third factor, an individual's selection history, interacts with top–down control mechanisms during visual search. Participants in our task were assigned to one of two groups in which they developed a history of either shape or color selection in one task, while searching for a shape singleton in a second task. A voluntary task selection procedure allowed participants to choose which task they would perform on each trial, thereby maximizing their top–down preparation. We recorded EEG throughout and extracted lateralized ERP components that index target selection (NT) and distractor suppression (PD). Our results showed that selection history continued to guide attention during visual search, even when top–down control mechanisms were maximized with voluntary task selection. For participants with a history of color selection, the NT component elicited by a shape target was attenuated when accompanied by a color distractor, and the distractor itself elicited a larger PD component. In addition, task-switching results revealed that participants in the color group had larger, asymmetric switch costs implying increased competition between task sets. Our results support the notion that selection history is a significant factor in attention guidance, orienting the visual system reflexively to objects that contradict an individual's current goals—even when these goals are intrinsically selected and prepared ahead of time.
Visual attention is guided by top-down mechanisms and pre-stimulus task preparation, but also by selection history (i.e., the bias to prioritize previously attended items). Here we examine how these influences combine. Two groups of participants completed two intermingled tasks. One task involved categorization of a unique target; one group categorized the target based on color, and the other based on shape. The other task involved searching for a target defined by unique shape while ignoring a distractor defined by unique color. Our expectation was that the search task would be difficult for the colorcategorization group because their categorization task required attentional resolution of color, but the search task required that they ignore color. In some experimental blocks, trials from the two tasks appeared predictably, giving the color-categorization group an opportunity to strategically prepare by switching between color-prioritizing and shape-prioritizing attentional templates.We looked to pre-stimulus oscillatory activity as a direct index of this preparation, and to reaction times and post-stimulus ERPs for markers of resultant change in attentional deployment. Results showed that preparation in the color-categorization group optimized attentional templates, such that these participants became less sensitive to the color distractor in the search task. But preparation was not sufficient to entirely negate the influence of selection history, and participants in the color-categorization group continued to show a propensity to attend to the color distractor. These results indicate that preparatory effort can be scaled to the anticipated attentional requirements, but attention is nevertheless considerably biased by selection history.
Predictive processing frameworks have demonstrated the central role that prediction plays in a range of cognitive processes including bottom-up and top-down mechanisms of attention control. However, relatively little is understood about how predictive processes interact with the third main determinant of attentional priority -selection history. In this experiment, participants developed a history of either color or shape selection while we observed the impact of these histories in an additional singleton search task using behavioral measures and ERP measures of attentional control. Throughout the experiment, participants were encouraged to predict the upcoming display, but prediction errors were either high or low depending on session. Persistent group differences in our results showed that selection history contributes to the precision weighting of a stimulus, and that this is mediated by overall prediction error. Color-singleton distractors captured attention and required greater suppression when participants had a history of color selection; however, these participants gained large benefits when the upcoming stimuli were highly predictable. We suggest that selection history modulates the precision expectations for a feature in a persistent and implicit way, producing an attentional bias that predictability can help to counteract, but cannot prevent or eliminate entirely.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.