Selective nontarget inhibition in Multiple Object Tracking

Pylyshyn, Zenon W.; Haladjian, Harry Haroutioun; King, Charles; Reilly, James E.

doi:10.1080/13506280802247486

Cited by 61 publications

(91 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Recent psychophysical studies have shown that detection of a probe stimulus presented at distractor locations is degraded compared with empty space, when subjects perform visual search tasks (Thomas & Lleras, 2009;Muller & von Muhlenen, 2000;Watson & Humphreys, 2000;Klein, 1988) or when subjects mentally track several moving objects in a multiple object tracking task (Flombaum, Scholl, & Pylyshyn, 2008;Pylyshyn, Haladjian, King, & Reilly, 2008;Pylyshyn, 2006;Ogawa, Takeda, & Yagi, 2002;Pylyshyn & Storm, 1988). These results indicate that visual processing at distractor locations is selectively inhibited irrespective of target locations, suggesting that the brain monitors the distractors separately from the targets (Flombaum et al, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 48%

“…These results indicate that visual processing at distractor locations is selectively inhibited irrespective of target locations, suggesting that the brain monitors the distractors separately from the targets (Flombaum et al, 2008). Importantly, the difficulties in probe detection at distractor locations have not been observed when subjects simply viewed the stimuli (Thomas & Lleras, 2009;Pylyshyn et al, 2008;Pylyshyn, 2006) or when the distractors did not interfere with task performance Cepeda, Cave, Bichot, & Kim, 1998), suggesting that the suppression of distractor processing is not an automatic process but rather under deliberate control. All of these previous findings indicate the existence of top-down signals for selective suppression of the distractor that are distinct from the signals highlighting the target.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 67%

“…In addition, we also found a novel type of neurons that exhibited greater firing modulation for the distractor than the target when and only when the distractor was identical to the target, suggesting that those signals were necessary to internally discriminate the objects. We propose that the signals monitoring the target may enhance visual processing for the target (Moore & Fallah, 2004;Moore & Armstrong, 2003), whereas those monitoring the distractor may selectively suppress visual processing for the distractor, which has been demonstrated repeatedly by psychological experiments (Thomas & Lleras, 2009;Pylyshyn et al, 2008;Muller & von Muhlenen, 2000;Klein, 1988).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Neuronal Correlates of Multiple Top–Down Signals during Covert Tracking of Moving Objects in Macaque Prefrontal Cortex

Matsushima

Tanaka²

2012

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract■ Resistance to distraction is a key component of executive functions and is strongly linked to the prefrontal cortex. Recent evidence suggests that neural mechanisms exist for selective suppression of task-irrelevant information. However, neuronal signals related to selective suppression have not yet been identified, whereas nonselective surround suppression, which results from attentional enhancement for relevant stimuli, has been well documented. This study examined single neuron activities in the lateral PFC when monkeys covertly tracked one of randomly moving objects. Although many neurons responded to the target, we also found a group of neurons that exhibited a selective response to the distractor that was visually identical to the target. Because most neurons were insensitive to an additional distractor that explicitly differed in color from the target, the brain seemed to monitor the distractor only when necessary to maintain internal object segregation. Our results suggest that the lateral PFC might provide at least two top-down signals during covert object tracking: one for enhancement of visual processing for the target and the other for selective suppression of visual processing for the distractor. These signals might work together to discriminate objects, thereby regulating both the sensitivity and specificity of target choice during covert object tracking. ■

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 48%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 67%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Neuronal Correlates of Multiple Top–Down Signals during Covert Tracking of Moving Objects in Macaque Prefrontal Cortex

Matsushima

Tanaka²

2012

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In general, tracking capacity is greater when no other distracting objects are present (Horowitz & Cohen 2008;Horowitz et al 2007) and decreases when the number of distractors increases (Bettencourt & Somers, 2009). Furthermore, by using a secondary probe detection task, researchers found that the detection of probes was less reliable on distractors compared to probes on targets and on an empty background (see Pylyshyn, 2006;Pylyshyn, Haladjian, King, & Reilly, 2008;Huff et al, 2012; but see Drew et al, 2009).…”

Section: Underestimated Objects: Distractorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

All eyes on relevance: strategic allocation of attention as a result of feature-based task demands in multiple object tracking

Brockhoff

Huff

2016

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multiple object tracking (MOT) plays a fundamental role in processing and interpreting dynamic environments. Regarding the type of information utilized by the observer, recent studies reported evidence for the use of object features in an automatic, low-level manner. By introducing a novel paradigm that allowed us to combine tracking with a noninterfering top-down task, we tested whether a voluntary component can regulate the deployment of attention to taskrelevant features in a selective manner. In four experiments we found conclusive evidence for a task-driven selection mechanism that guides attention during tracking: The observers were able to ignore or prioritize distinct objects. They marked the distinct (cued) object (target/distractor) more or less often than other objects of the same type (targets /distractors)-but only when they had received an identification task that required them to actively process object features (cues) during tracking. These effects are discussed with regard to existing theoretical approaches to attentive tracking, gaze-cue usability as well as attentional readiness, a term that originally stems from research on attention capture and visual search. Our findings indicate that existing theories of MOT need to be adjusted to allow for flexible top-down, voluntary processing during tracking.

show abstract

“…In fact, such inhibition is specific to the irrelevant objects marked for inhibition and does not occur in the empty space near those objects (Pylyshyn, 2006;Pylyshyn, Haladjian, King, & Reilly, 2008), nor on objects clearly segregated within three-dimensional space (Haladjian, Montemayor, & Pylyshyn, 2008). Attentional capture is more likely to occur in the empty space between moving objects than on the irrelevant objects that are being inhibited (even when controlling for object-related masking effects).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

On the evolution of conscious attention

Haladjian

Montemayor

2014

Psychon Bull Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper aims to clarify the relationship between consciousness and attention through theoretical considerations about evolution. Specifically, we will argue that the empirical findings on attention and the basic considerations concerning the evolution of the different forms of attention demonstrate that consciousness and attention must be dissociated regardless of which definition of these terms one uses. To the best of our knowledge, no extant view on the relationship between consciousness and attention has this advantage. Because of this characteristic, this paper presents a principled and neutral way to settle debates concerning the relationship between consciousness and attention, without falling into disputes about the meaning of these terms. A decisive conclusion of this approach is that extreme views on the relationship between consciousness and attention must be rejected, including identity and full dissociation views. There is an overlap between the two within conscious attention, but developing a full understanding of this mechanism requires further empirical investigations.

show abstract

Selective nontarget inhibition in Multiple Object Tracking

Cited by 61 publications

References 15 publications

Neuronal Correlates of Multiple Top–Down Signals during Covert Tracking of Moving Objects in Macaque Prefrontal Cortex

Neuronal Correlates of Multiple Top–Down Signals during Covert Tracking of Moving Objects in Macaque Prefrontal Cortex

All eyes on relevance: strategic allocation of attention as a result of feature-based task demands in multiple object tracking

On the evolution of conscious attention

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About