昙花一现?干扰抑制不能从早期的偏侧化积极推断。

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 NEUROSCIENCES
Matt Oxner, Dirk van Moorselaar, Matthias M Müller, Jan Theeuwes
{"title":"昙花一现?干扰抑制不能从早期的偏侧化积极推断。","authors":"Matt Oxner, Dirk van Moorselaar, Matthias M Müller, Jan Theeuwes","doi":"10.1162/jocn.a.57","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Humans excel at avoiding distraction in visual environments, successfully filtering out repeated salient distractors that could otherwise capture attention. A recent theoretical perspective posits a mechanism whereby such distractors can be proactively suppressed, reducing their impact on attentional deployment. Electrophysiological evidence for this view comes from the distractor positivity (PD), a neural component associated with distractor handling. The PD has been observed at early latencies (<200 msec) following distractor appearance, a timing interpreted as reflecting distractor suppression before attentional capture. However, the relationship between this \"early PD\" and distractor suppression remains fundamentally correlational. This raises critical questions about the extent to which this neural marker exclusively indexes mechanisms of suppression, as opposed to being driven by other factors confounded with distractor presence, such as stimulus salience. We tested the specificity of this early positivity to distractor handling across three experiments employing visual search tasks. Participants were presented with unique color singletons serving as distractors, targets, or task-irrelevant items. The early lateralized positivity was elicited by salient color distractors, but also appeared in response to all other salient singletons, including those that could not be proactively suppressed. Our findings indicate that the early positivity is not unique to suppressed distractors-instead, it likely reflects sensory imbalance between visual hemifields or salience tagging in response to lateralized stimuli. Consequently, we argue that the \"early PD\" does not provide definitive evidence for proactive distractor suppression, as its association with distractor presence appears to be incidental rather than causal.</p>","PeriodicalId":51081,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience","volume":" ","pages":"1-19"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Flash in the Pan? Distractor Suppression Cannot Be Inferred from the Early Lateralized Positivity.\",\"authors\":\"Matt Oxner, Dirk van Moorselaar, Matthias M Müller, Jan Theeuwes\",\"doi\":\"10.1162/jocn.a.57\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Humans excel at avoiding distraction in visual environments, successfully filtering out repeated salient distractors that could otherwise capture attention. A recent theoretical perspective posits a mechanism whereby such distractors can be proactively suppressed, reducing their impact on attentional deployment. Electrophysiological evidence for this view comes from the distractor positivity (PD), a neural component associated with distractor handling. The PD has been observed at early latencies (<200 msec) following distractor appearance, a timing interpreted as reflecting distractor suppression before attentional capture. However, the relationship between this \\\"early PD\\\" and distractor suppression remains fundamentally correlational. This raises critical questions about the extent to which this neural marker exclusively indexes mechanisms of suppression, as opposed to being driven by other factors confounded with distractor presence, such as stimulus salience. We tested the specificity of this early positivity to distractor handling across three experiments employing visual search tasks. Participants were presented with unique color singletons serving as distractors, targets, or task-irrelevant items. The early lateralized positivity was elicited by salient color distractors, but also appeared in response to all other salient singletons, including those that could not be proactively suppressed. Our findings indicate that the early positivity is not unique to suppressed distractors-instead, it likely reflects sensory imbalance between visual hemifields or salience tagging in response to lateralized stimuli. Consequently, we argue that the \\\"early PD\\\" does not provide definitive evidence for proactive distractor suppression, as its association with distractor presence appears to be incidental rather than causal.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51081,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-19\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.a.57\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.a.57","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人类擅长在视觉环境中避免分心,成功地过滤掉那些可能会吸引注意力的反复突出的分心因素。最近的一个理论观点假设了一种机制,即这些干扰物可以被主动抑制,减少它们对注意力部署的影响。这一观点的电生理学证据来自分心物正性(PD),这是一种与分心物处理相关的神经成分。在早期延迟时观察到PD (
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Flash in the Pan? Distractor Suppression Cannot Be Inferred from the Early Lateralized Positivity.

Humans excel at avoiding distraction in visual environments, successfully filtering out repeated salient distractors that could otherwise capture attention. A recent theoretical perspective posits a mechanism whereby such distractors can be proactively suppressed, reducing their impact on attentional deployment. Electrophysiological evidence for this view comes from the distractor positivity (PD), a neural component associated with distractor handling. The PD has been observed at early latencies (<200 msec) following distractor appearance, a timing interpreted as reflecting distractor suppression before attentional capture. However, the relationship between this "early PD" and distractor suppression remains fundamentally correlational. This raises critical questions about the extent to which this neural marker exclusively indexes mechanisms of suppression, as opposed to being driven by other factors confounded with distractor presence, such as stimulus salience. We tested the specificity of this early positivity to distractor handling across three experiments employing visual search tasks. Participants were presented with unique color singletons serving as distractors, targets, or task-irrelevant items. The early lateralized positivity was elicited by salient color distractors, but also appeared in response to all other salient singletons, including those that could not be proactively suppressed. Our findings indicate that the early positivity is not unique to suppressed distractors-instead, it likely reflects sensory imbalance between visual hemifields or salience tagging in response to lateralized stimuli. Consequently, we argue that the "early PD" does not provide definitive evidence for proactive distractor suppression, as its association with distractor presence appears to be incidental rather than causal.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
3.10%
发文量
151
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience investigates brain–behavior interaction and promotes lively interchange among the mind sciences.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信