Performance‐dependent reward hurts performance: The non‐monotonic attentional load modulation on task‐irrelevant distractor processing

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xin He ◽  
Weilin Liu ◽  
Nan Qin ◽  
Lili Lyu ◽  
Xue Dong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Distractor Processing ◽  
Attentional Load ◽  
Load Modulation ◽  
Task Irrelevant

scholarly journals Auditory Working Memory Load Impairs Visual Ventral Stream Processing: Toward a Unified Model of Attentional Load

2010 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 437-446 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane Klemen ◽  
Christian Büchel ◽  
Mira Bühler ◽  
Mareike M. Menz ◽  
Michael Rose
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Cognitive Load ◽  
Human Performance ◽  
Memory Load ◽  
Matching Task ◽  
Load Theory ◽  
Attentional Load ◽  
Relevant Task ◽  
Task Irrelevant

Attentional interference between tasks performed in parallel is known to have strong and often undesired effects. As yet, however, the mechanisms by which interference operates remain elusive. A better knowledge of these processes may facilitate our understanding of the effects of attention on human performance and the debilitating consequences that disruptions to attention can have. According to the load theory of cognitive control, processing of task-irrelevant stimuli is increased by attending in parallel to a relevant task with high cognitive demands. This is due to the relevant task engaging cognitive control resources that are, hence, unavailable to inhibit the processing of task-irrelevant stimuli. However, it has also been demonstrated that a variety of types of load (perceptual and emotional) can result in a reduction of the processing of task-irrelevant stimuli, suggesting a uniform effect of increased load irrespective of the type of load. In the present study, we concurrently presented a relevant auditory matching task [n-back working memory (WM)] of low or high cognitive load (1-back or 2-back WM) and task-irrelevant images at one of three object visibility levels (0%, 50%, or 100%). fMRI activation during the processing of the task-irrelevant visual stimuli was measured in the lateral occipital cortex and found to be reduced under high, compared to low, WM load. In combination with previous findings, this result is suggestive of a more generalized load theory, whereby cognitive load, as well as other types of load (e.g., perceptual), can result in a reduction of the processing of task-irrelevant stimuli, in line with a uniform effect of increased load irrespective of the type of load.

scholarly journals Working Memory Capacity Is Negatively Associated with Memory Load Modulation of Alpha Oscillations in Retention of Verbal Working Memory

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (12) ◽  
pp. 1933-1945 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhenhong Hu ◽  
Christopher M. Barkley ◽  
Susan E. Marino ◽  
Chao Wang ◽  
Abhijit Rajan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Memory Load ◽  
Working Memory Capacity ◽  
Verbal Working Memory ◽  
Memory Capacity ◽  
Alpha Power ◽  
Alpha Oscillations ◽  
Load Modulation ◽  
Task Irrelevant ◽  
With Memory

Working memory capacity (WMC) measures the amount of information that can be maintained online in the face of distraction. Past work has shown that the efficiency with which the frontostriatal circuit filters out task-irrelevant distracting information is positively correlated with WMC. Recent work has demonstrated a role of posterior alpha oscillations (8–13 Hz) in providing a sensory gating mechanism. We investigated the relationship between memory load modulation of alpha power and WMC in two verbal working memory experiments. In both experiments, we found that posterior alpha power increased with memory load during memory, in agreement with previous reports. Across individuals, the degree of alpha power modulation by memory load was negatively associated with WMC, namely, the higher the WMC, the less alpha power was modulated by memory load. After the administration of topiramate, a drug known to affect alpha oscillations and have a negative impact on working memory function, the negative correlation between memory load modulation of alpha power and WMC was no longer statistically significant but still somewhat detectable. These results suggest that (1) individuals with low WMC demonstrate stronger alpha power modulation by memory load, reflecting possibly an increased reliance on sensory gating to suppress task-irrelevant information in these individuals, in contrast to their high WMC counterparts who rely more on frontal areas to perform this function and (2) this negative association between memory load modulation of alpha oscillations and WMC is vulnerable to drug-related cognitive disruption.

scholarly journals Differing Time Courses of Reward-Related Attentional Processing: An EEG Source-Space Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denise E. L. Lockhofen ◽  
Nils Hübner ◽  
Fatma Hemdan ◽  
Gebhard Sammer ◽  
Dion Henare ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Attentional Selection ◽  
Neural Mechanisms ◽  
Anterior Cingulate ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Attentional Processing ◽  
Attention Network ◽  
Space Analysis ◽  
Distractor Processing ◽  
Time Courses ◽  
Task Irrelevant

AbstractSince our environment typically contains more information than can be processed at any one time due to the limited capacity of our visual system, we are bound to differentiate between relevant and irrelevant information. This process, termed attentional selection, is usually categorized into bottom-up and top-down processes. However, recent research suggests reward might also be an important factor in guiding attention. Monetary reward can bias attentional selection in favor of task-relevant targets and reduce the efficiency of visual search when a reward-associated, but task-irrelevant distractor is present. This study is the first to investigate reward-related target and distractor processing in an additional singleton task using neurophysiological measures and source space analysis. Based on previous studies, we hypothesized that source space analysis would find enhanced neural activity in regions of the value-based attention network, such as the visual cortex and the anterior cingulate. Additionally, we went further and explored the time courses of the underlying attentional mechanisms. Our neurophysiological results showed that rewarding distractors led to a stronger attentional capture. In line with this, we found that reward-associated distractors (compared with reward-associated targets) enhanced activation in frontal regions, indicating the involvement of top-down control processes. As hypothesized, source space analysis demonstrated that reward-related targets and reward-related distractors elicited activation in regions of the value-based attention network. However, these activations showed time-dependent differences, indicating that the neural mechanisms underlying reward biasing might be different for task-relevant and task-irrelevant stimuli.

Individual Differences in the Attentional Blink

2009 ◽  
Vol 56 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sander Martens ◽  
Nikola Valchev
Keyword(s):  
Attentional Blink ◽  
Target Identification ◽  
Irrelevant Information ◽  
Present Evidence ◽  
Distractor Processing ◽  
Temporal Intervals ◽  
Irrelevant Distractors ◽  
Task Conditions ◽  
Task Irrelevant ◽  
Identification Processes

A well-established phenomenon in the study of attention is the attentional blink (AB): a deficit in reporting the second of two targets when it occurs 200–500 ms after the first. Although the effect has been shown to be robust in a wide variety of task conditions, we recently reported that some individuals show little or no AB, and presented psychophysiological evidence that target processing differs in nonblinkers (who do not show an AB) and blinkers (who do show an AB). Here we present evidence that the level of distractor processing and subsequent interference with target identification processes also differs between the two groups. In one task, two masked targets were centrally presented at varying temporal intervals, with or without additional distractors. In a second task, the masked targets were presented eccentrically, with or without the presence of a central sequential stream of the task-irrelevant distractors. In both cases, the presence of distractors led to an increased AB magnitude in blinkers, whereas performance for nonblinkers remained relatively unaffected. The results thus support the hypothesis that nonblinkers are more efficient in ignoring irrelevant information than blinkers.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document