Department of Experimental and Applied Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Institute of Brain and Behaviour Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Department of Experimental and Applied Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Cortex. 2021 Apr;137:232-250. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2021.01.010. Epub 2021 Feb 5.
A rapidly growing body of research indicates that inhibition of distracting information may not be under flexible, top-down control, but instead heavily relies on expectations derived from past experience about the likelihood of events. Yet, how expectations about distracting information influence distractor inhibition at the neural level remains unclear. To determine how expectations induced by distractor features and/or location regularities modulate distractor processing, we measured EEG while participants performed two variants of the additional singleton paradigm. Critically, in these different variants, target and distractor features either randomly swapped across trials, or were fixed, allowing for the development of distractor feature-based expectations. Moreover, the task was initially performed without any spatial regularity, after which a high probability distractor location was introduced. Our results show that both distractor feature- and location regularities contributed to distractor inhibition, as indicated by corresponding reductions in distractor costs during visual search and an earlier distractor-evoked Pd component. Yet, control analyses showed that while observers were sensitive to regularities across longer time scales, the observed effects to a large extent reflected intertrial repetition. Large individual differences further suggest a functional dissociation between early and late Pd components, with the former reflecting early sensory suppression related to intertrial priming and the latter reflecting suppression sensitive to expectations derived over a longer time scale. Also, counter to some previous findings, no increase in anticipatory alpha-band activity was observed over visual regions representing the expected distractor location, although this effect should be interpreted with caution as the effect of spatial statistical learning was also less pronounced than in other studies. Together, these findings suggest that intertrial priming and statistical learning may both contribute to distractor suppression and reveal the underlying neural mechanisms.
越来越多的研究表明,抑制分心信息可能不受灵活的自上而下控制的影响,而是严重依赖于过去经验中关于事件发生可能性的预期。然而,关于分心信息的期望如何在神经水平上影响分心抑制仍然不清楚。为了确定分心特征和/或位置规律的期望如何调节分心处理,我们在参与者执行两种附加单一范式变体时测量了 EEG。关键是,在这些不同的变体中,目标和分心特征在试验之间随机交换,或者是固定的,从而可以产生基于分心特征的期望。此外,该任务最初是在没有任何空间规律的情况下执行的,之后引入了一个高概率的分心位置。我们的结果表明,分心特征和位置规律都有助于分心抑制,这表现在视觉搜索过程中分心成本相应降低,以及更早的分心诱发 Pd 成分。然而,控制分析表明,尽管观察者对更长时间尺度上的规律敏感,但观察到的效应在很大程度上反映了试验间重复。大的个体差异进一步表明,早期和晚期 Pd 成分之间存在功能分离,前者反映了与试验间启动相关的早期感觉抑制,后者反映了对更长时间尺度上产生的期望敏感的抑制。此外,与一些先前的发现相反,在代表预期分心位置的视觉区域上没有观察到预期的 alpha 波段活动增加,尽管应该谨慎解释这种效应,因为空间统计学习的效应也不如其他研究明显。总的来说,这些发现表明,试验间启动和统计学习都可能有助于分心抑制,并揭示了潜在的神经机制。