Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26791226›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2016

Orchestrating Proactive and Reactive Mechanisms for Filtering Distracting Information: Brain-Behavior Relationships Revealed by a Mixed-Design fMRI Study.

Francesco Marini, Elise Demeter, Kenneth C Roberts, Leonardo Chelazzi, Marty G Woldorff

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Predictive Distractor Processing Relies on Integrated Proactive and Reactive Attentional Mechanisms.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Changes in visual cortical processing attenuate singleton distraction during visual search.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Francesco MariniCenter for Cognitive Neuroscience, Department of Psychology, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan 20126, Italy, Department of Psychology, University of California, San Diego, California 92093.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4071-4783
Elise DemeterCenter for Cognitive Neuroscience.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5993-1692
Kenneth C RobertsCenter for Cognitive Neuroscience.
Leonardo ChelazziDepartment of Neurological, Biomedical and Movement Science, University of Verona, Verona 37134, Italy, and Italian Institute of Neuroscience, Verona 37134, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8566-0611
Marty G WoldorffCenter for Cognitive Neuroscience, Departments of Psychiatry and Psychology and Neuroscience, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708, woldorff@duke.edu.

Funding

Studies of Attention Using Combined ERPs and fMRIR01MH060415 · NIMH · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI WOLDORFF, MARTY G. · 2001 to 2013
$3.6M
Attentional Mechanisms in Multisensory EnvironmentsR01NS051048 · NINDS · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI WOLDORFF, MARTY G. · 2006 to 2016
$3.5M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH060415NIMH NIH HHS R01-MH060415NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS051048NINDS NIH HHS R01-NS051048
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Given the information overload often imparted to human cognitive-processing systems, suppression of irrelevant and distracting information is essential for successful behavior. Using a hybrid block/event-related fMRI design, we characterized proactive and reactive brain mechanisms for filtering distracting stimuli. Participants performed a flanker task, discriminating the direction of a target arrow in the presence versus absence of congruent or incongruent flanking distracting arrows during either Pure blocks (distracters always absent) or Mixed blocks (distracters on 80% of trials). Each Mixed block had either 20% or 60% incongruent trials. Activations in the dorsal frontoparietal attention network during Mixed versus Pure blocks evidenced proactive (blockwise) recruitment of a distraction-filtering mechanism. Sustained activations in right middle frontal gyrus during 60% Incongruent blocks correlated positively with behavioral indices of distraction-filtering (slowing when distracters might occur) and negatively with distraction-related behavioral costs (incongruent vs congruent trials), suggesting a role in coordinating proactive filtering of potential distracters. Event-related analyses showed that incongruent trials elicited greater reactive activations in 20% (vs 60%) Incongruent blocks for counteracting distraction and conflict, including in the insula and anterior cingulate. Context-related effects in occipitoparietal cortex consisted of greater target-evoked activations for distracter-absent trials (central-target-only) in Mixed versus Pure blocks, suggesting enhanced attentional engagement. Functional-localizer analyses in V1/V2/V3 revealed less distracter-processing activity in 60% (vs 20%) Incongruent blocks, presumably reflecting tonic suppression by proactive filtering mechanisms. These results delineate brain mechanisms underlying proactive and reactive filtering of distraction and conflict, and how they are orchestrated depending on distraction probability, thereby aiding task performance. Significance statement: Irrelevant stimuli distract people and impair their attentional performance. Here, we studied how the brain deals with distracting stimuli using a hybrid block/event-related fMRI design and a task that varied the probability of the occurrence of such distracting stimuli. The results suggest that when distraction is likely, a region in right frontal cortex proactively implements attentional control mechanisms to help filter out any distracting stimuli that might occur. In contrast, when distracting input occurs infrequently, this region is more reactively engaged to help limit the negative consequences of the distracters on behavioral performance. Our results thus help illuminate how the brain flexibly responds under differing attentional demands to engender effective behavior.

Indexed as

Conflict, PsychologicalAdolescentAdultAttentionBrainBrain MappingFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMalePhotic StimulationPsychomotor PerformanceReaction TimeYoung Adultattentioncognitive controldistraction filteringflanker taskmixed-design fMRI

Identifiers

PMID26791226
PMCPMC4719027

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.