ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2023
Differential modulation of visual responses by distractor or target expectations.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Distractor inhibition by alpha oscillations is controlled by an indirect mechanism governed by goal-relevant information.Communications psychology · 2024Review
- Contextual and Temporal Constraints for Attentional Capture: Commentary on Theeuwes' 2023 Review "The Attentional Capture Debate: When Can We Avoid Salient Distractors and when Not?"Journal of cognition · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Discriminating relevant from irrelevant information in a busy visual scene is supported by statistical regularities in the environment. However, it is unclear to what extent immediate stimulus repetitions and higher order expectations (whether a repetition is statistically probable or not) are supported by the same neural mechanisms. Moreover, it is also unclear whether target and distractor-related processing are mediated by the same or different underlying neural mechanisms. Using a speeded target discrimination task, the present study implicitly cued subjects to the location of the target or the distractor via manipulations in the underlying stimulus predictability. In separate studies, we collected EEG and MEG alongside behavioural data. Results showed that reaction times were reduced with increased expectations for both types of stimuli and that these effects were driven by expected repetitions in both cases. Despite the similar behavioural pattern across target and distractors, neurophysiological measures distinguished the two stimuli. Specifically, the amplitude of the P1 was modulated by stimulus relevance, being reduced for repeated distractors and increased for repeated targets. The P1 was not, however, modulated by higher order stimulus expectations. These expectations were instead reflected in modulations in ERP amplitude and theta power in frontocentral electrodes. Finally, we observed that a single repetition of a distractor was sufficient to reduce decodability of stimulus spatial location and was also accompanied by diminished representation of stimulus features. Our results highlight the unique mechanisms involved in distractor expectation and suppression and underline the importance of studying these processes distinctly from target-related attentional control.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.