Search for: All records

Our behavioral goals shape how we process information via attentional filters that prioritize goal-relevant information, dictating both where we attend and what we attend to. When something unexpected or salient appears in the environment, it captures our spatial attention. Extensive research has focused on the spatiotemporal aspects of attentional capture, but what happens to concurrent nonspatial filters during visual distraction? Here, we demonstrate a novel, broader consequence of distraction: widespread disruption to filters that regulate category-specific object processing. We recorded fMRI while participants viewed arrays of face/house hybrid images. On distractor-absent trials, we found robust evidence for the standard signature of category-tuned attentional filtering: greater BOLD activation in fusiform face area during attend-faces blocks and in parahippocampal place area during attend-houses blocks. However, on trials where a salient distractor (white rectangle) flashed abruptly around a nontarget location, not only was spatial attention captured, but the concurrent category-tuned attentional filter was disrupted, revealing a boost in activation for the to-be-ignored category. This disruption was robust, resulting in errant processing—and early on, prioritization—of goal-inconsistent information. These findings provide a direct test of the filter disruption theory: that in addition to disrupting spatial attention, distraction also disrupts nonspatial attentional filters tuned to goal-relevant information. Moreover, these results reveal that, under certain circumstances, the filter disruption may be so profound as to induce a full reversal of the attentional control settings, which carries novel implications for both theory and real-world perception.

This opinion piece is part of a collection on the topic: “What is attention?” Despite the word's place in the common vernacular, a satisfying definition for “attention” remains elusive. Part of the challenge is there exist many different types of attention, which may or may not share common mechanisms. Here we review this literature and offer an intuitive definition that draws from aspects of prior theories and models of attention but is broad enough to recognize the various types of attention and modalities it acts upon: attention as a multi‐level system of weights and balances. While the specific mechanism(s) governing the weighting/balancing may vary across levels, the fundamental role of attention is to dynamically weigh and balance all signals—both externally‐generated and internally‐generated—such that the highest weighted signals are selected and enhanced. Top‐down, bottom‐up, and experience‐driven factors dynamically impact this balancing, and competition occurs both within and across multiple levels of processing. This idea of a multi‐level system of weights and balances is intended to incorporate both external and internal attention and capture their myriad of constantly interacting processes. We review key findings and open questions related to external attention guidance, internal attention and working memory, and broader attentional control (e.g., ongoing competition between external stimuli and internal thoughts) within the framework of this analogy. We also speculate about the implications of failures of attention in terms of weights and balances, ranging from momentary one‐off errors to clinical disorders, as well as attentional development and degradation across the lifespan.

This article is categorized under:

Psychology > Attention