September 2024
Volume 24, Issue 10
Open Access
Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting Abstract  |   September 2024
Cue-guided search facilitates attentional selection: Evidence from an EEG study
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Sizhu Han
    Philipps-University Marburg
  • Anna Schubö
    Philipps-University Marburg
  • Footnotes
    Acknowledgements  This research was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation – SFB/TRR 135, project number 222641018, TP B3).
Journal of Vision September 2024, Vol.24, 826. doi:https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.24.10.826
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Sizhu Han, Anna Schubö; Cue-guided search facilitates attentional selection: Evidence from an EEG study. Journal of Vision 2024;24(10):826. https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.24.10.826.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Understanding how features guide attention amidst distractions is crucial in deciphering attentional templates. Early research has found that presenting target-relevant information (i.e., positive cue) ahead of the search task facilitates attentional guidance; more recent studies suggest that information about distractions (i.e., negative cue) can also be used to direct attention away from distractors. Yet, the underlying neural mechanisms are not well understood. The current study addressed this issue by adopting a modified cue-guided search paradigm, combined with EEG recordings, to examine how electrophysiological markers of attentional selection (N2pc and PD) were modulated by positive, negative and neutral cues. Behavioral results showed that positive cues led to faster response times (RTs) compared to negative and neutral cues. In line with this finding, ERP results time-locked to the search display showed an earlier onset of the target N2pc for positive cues compared to negative and neutral cues. Interestingly, results for negative cues were more heterogeneous across participants: 16 demonstrated improved RTs, while 14 showed increased RTs compared to neutral cues. This variability was also reflected in ERP results. With a negative cue, lateralized distractors in the search display were followed by a PD component, predominantly in participants who benefited from negative cues in RTs. Moreover, positive cues elicited larger lateralized alpha power than negative cues before the search display onset, suggesting a difference in anticipatory alpha activity. These findings suggested that both positive and negative cues can be used to facilitate attentional selection, but the strategy of using negative cues is more participant-dependent.

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×