Capturing attention

Evans and Treisman (2010) showed systematic interactions between audition and vision when participants made speeded classifications in one modality while supposedly ignoring another. We found perceptual facilitation between high pitch and high visual position, high spatial frequency and small size, and interference between high pitch and low position, low spatial frequency and large size, while the converse was the case between low pitch and the same visual features. The present study examined the role of selective attention in these cross-modal interactions. Participants performed speeded classification or search tasks of low or high load while attempting to ignore irrelevant stimuli in a different modality. In both paradigms, congruency between the visual and the irrelevant auditory stimulus had an equal effect in the low and in the high perceptual load conditions. A third experiment tested divided attention, requiring participants to compare stimuli across modalities and respond to the visual-auditory compound. The congruency effect was as large with attention focused on one modality as when it was divided across both. These findings offer converging evidence that cross-modal interactions between corresponding basic features are independent of selective attention.

Gaze-cueing is the automatic spatial orienting of attention in the direction of perceived gaze. Participants respond faster to targets located at positions congruent with the direction of gaze, compared to incongruent ones (gaze cueing effect, GCE). However, it still remains unclear whether its occurrence depends on intact integration of information from the entire eye region or face, rather than simply the presence of the eyes per se. To address this question, we investigated the GCE in PS, an extensively studied case of pure acquired prosopagnosia. In our gaze-cueing paradigm, we manipulated the duration at which cues were presented (70 ms vs. 400 ms) and the availability of facial information (full-face vs. eyes-only). For 70 ms cue duration, we found a context-dependent dissociation between PS and controls: PS showed a GCE for eyes-only stimuli, whereas controls showed a GCE only for full-face stimuli. For 400 ms cue duration, PS showed gaze-cueing independently of stimulus context, whereas in healthy controls a GCE again emerged only for full-face stimuli. Our findings suggest that attentional deployment based on the gaze direction of briefly presented faces requires intact processing of facial information, which affords salience to the eye region.

Stimuli from multiple sensory organs can be integrated into a coherent representation through multiple phases of multisensory processing; this phenomenon is called multisensory integration. Multisensory integration can interact with attention. Here, we propose a framework in which attention modulates multisensory processing in both endogenous (goal-driven) and exogenous (stimulus-driven) ways. Moreover, multisensory integration exerts not only bottom-up but also top-down control over attention. Specifically, we propose the following: (1) endogenous attentional selectivity acts on multiple levels of multisensory processing to determine the extent to which simultaneous stimuli from different modalities can be integrated; (2) integrated multisensory events exert top-down control on attentional capture via multisensory search templates that are stored in the brain; (3) integrated multisensory events can capture attention efficiently, even in quite complex circumstances, due to their increased salience compared to unimodal events and can thus improve search accuracy; and (4) within a multisensory object, endogenous attention can spread from one modality to another in an exogenous manner.

Distraction is one of the main problems encountered by people with degenerative diseases that are associated with reduced cortical cholinergic innervations. We examined the effects of donepezil, a cholinesterase inhibitor, on stimulus-driven attentional capture. Reflexive attention shifts to a distractor are usually elicited by abrupt peripheral changes. This bottom-up shift of attention to a salient item is thought to be the result of relatively inflexible hardwired mechanisms. Thirty young male participants were randomly allocated to one of two groups: placebo first/donepezil second session or the opposite. They were asked to locate a target appearing above and below fixation whilst a peripheral distractor moved abruptly (motion-jitter attentional capture condition) or not (baseline condition). A classical attentional capture effect was observed under placebo: moving distractors interfered with the task in slowing down response times as compared to the baseline condition with fixed distractors. Increased interference from moving distractors was found under donepezil. We suggest that attentional capture in our paradigm likely involved low level mechanisms such as automatic reflexive orienting. Peripheral motion-jitter elicited a rapid reflexive orienting response initiated by a cholinergic signal from the brainstem pedunculo-pontine nucleus that activates nicotinic receptors in the superior colliculus.