A Revised Framework for the Investigation of Expectation Update Versus Maintenance in the Context of Expectation Violations: The ViolEx 2.0 Model

Expectations are probabilistic beliefs about the future that shape and influence our perception, affect, cognition, and behavior in many contexts. This makes expectations a highly relevant concept across basic and applied psychological disciplines. When expectations are confirmed or violated, individuals can respond by either updating or maintaining their prior expectations in light of the new evidence. Moreover, proactive and reactive behavior can change the probability with which individuals encounter expectation confirmations or violations. The investigation of predictors and mechanisms underlying expectation update and maintenance has been approached from many research perspectives. However, in many instances there has been little exchange between different research fields. To further advance research on expectations and expectation violations, collaborative efforts across different disciplines in psychology, cognitive (neuro)science, and other life sciences are warranted. For fostering and facilitating such efforts, we introduce the ViolEx 2.0 model, a revised framework for interdisciplinary research on cognitive and behavioral mechanisms of expectation update and maintenance in the context of expectation violations. To support different goals and stages in interdisciplinary exchange, the ViolEx 2.0 model features three model levels with varying degrees of specificity in order to address questions about the research synopsis, central concepts, or functional processes and relationships, respectively. The framework can be applied to different research fields and has high potential for guiding collaborative research efforts in expectation research

Acting while perceiving: assimilation precedes contrast

To explore the nature of specific interactions between concurrent perception and action, participants were asked to move one of their hands in a certain direction while simultaneously observing an independent stimulus motion of a (dis)similar direction. The kinematics of the hand trajectories revealed a form of contrast effect (CE) in that the produced directions were biased away from the perceived directions (“Experiment 1”). Specifically, the endpoints of horizontal movements were lower when having watched an upward as opposed to a downward motion. However, when participants moved under higher speed constraints and were not presented with the stimulus motion prior to initiating their movements, the CE was preceded by an assimilation effect, i.e., movements were biased toward the stimulus motion directions (“Experiment 2”). These findings extend those of related studies by showing that CEs of this type actually correspond to the second phase of a bi-phasic pattern of specific perception–action interference

On interference effects in concurrent perception and action

Recent studies have reported repulsion effects between the perception of visual motion and the concurrent production of hand movements. Two models, based on the notions of common coding and internal forward modeling, have been proposed to account for these phenomena. They predict that the size of the effects in perception and action should be monotonically related and vary with the amount of similarity between what is produced and perceived. These predictions were tested in four experiments in which participants were asked to make hand movements in certain directions while simultaneously encoding the direction of an independent stimulus motion. As expected, perceived directions were repelled by produced directions, and produced directions were repelled by perceived directions. However, contrary to the models, the size of the effects in perception and action did not covary, nor did they depend (as predicted) on the amount of perception–action similarity. We propose that such interactions are mediated by the activation of categorical representations

Terms of debate: consensus definitions to guide the scientific discourse on visual distraction

Hypothesis-driven research rests on clearly articulated scientific theories. The building blocks for communicating these theories are scientific terms. Obviously, communication – and thus, scientific progress – is hampered if the meaning of these terms varies idiosyncratically across (sub)fields and even across individual researchers within the same subfield. We have formed an international group of experts representing various theoretical stances with the goal to homogenize the use of the terms that are most relevant to fundamental research on visual distraction in visual search. Our discussions revealed striking heterogeneity and we had to invest much time and effort to increase our mutual understanding of each other’s use of central terms, which turned out to be strongly related to our respective theoretical positions. We present the outcomes of these discussions in a glossary and provide some context in several essays. Specifically, we explicate how central terms are used in the distraction literature and consensually sharpen their definitions in order to enable communication across theoretical standpoints. Where applicable, we also explain how the respective constructs can be measured. We believe that this novel type of adversarial collaboration can serve as a model for other fields of psychological research that strive to build a solid groundwork for theorizing and communicating by establishing a common language. For the field of visual distraction, the present paper should facilitate communication across theoretical standpoints and may serve as an introduction and reference text for newcomers

Event-Related Potentials Dissociate Effects of Salience and Space in Biased Competition for Visual Representation

BACKGROUND: Selective visual attention is the process by which the visual system enhances behaviorally relevant stimuli and filters out others. Visual attention is thought to operate through a cortical mechanism known as biased competition. Representations of stimuli within cortical visual areas compete such that they mutually suppress each others' neural response. Competition increases with stimulus proximity and can be biased in favor of one stimulus (over another) as a function of stimulus significance, salience, or expectancy. Though there is considerable evidence of biased competition within the human visual system, the dynamics of the process remain unknown. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Here, we used scalp-recorded electroencephalography (EEG) to examine neural correlates of biased competition in the human visual system. In two experiments, subjects performed a task requiring them to either simultaneously identify two targets (Experiment 1) or discriminate one target while ignoring a decoy (Experiment 2). Competition was manipulated by altering the spatial separation between target(s) and/or decoy. Both experimental tasks should induce competition between stimuli. However, only the task of Experiment 2 should invoke a strong bias in favor of the target (over the decoy). The amplitude of two lateralized components of the event-related potential, the N2pc and Ptc, mirrored these predictions. N2pc amplitude increased with increasing stimulus separation in Experiments 1 and 2. However, Ptc amplitude varied only in Experiment 2, becoming more positive with decreased spatial separation. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: These results suggest that N2pc and Ptc components may index distinct processes of biased competition--N2pc reflecting visual competitive interactions and Ptc reflecting a bias in processing necessary to individuate task-relevant stimuli

What do cyclists need to see to avoid single-bicycle crashes?

The number of single-bicycle crash victims is substantial in countries with high levels of cycling. To study the role of visual characteristics of the infrastructure, such as pavement markings, in single-bicycle crashes, a study in two steps was conducted. In Study 1, a questionnaire study was conducted among bicycle crash victims (n = 734). Logistic regression was used to study the relationship between the crashes and age, light condition, alcohol use, gaze direction and familiarity with the crash scene. In Study 2, the image degrading and edge detection method (IDED-method) was used to investigate the visual characteristics of 21 of the crash scenes. The results of the studies indicate that crashes, in which the cyclist collided with a bollard or road narrowing or rode off the road, were related to the visual characteristics of bicycle facilities. Edge markings, especially in curves of bicycle tracks, and improved conspicuity of bollards are recommended. Statement of Relevance: Elevated single-bicycle crash numbers are common in countries with high levels of cycling. No research has been conducted on what cyclists need to see to avoid this type of crash. The IDED-method to investigate crash scenes is new and proves to be a powerful tool to quantify 'visual accessibility'. © 2011 Taylor & Francis

Don’t make me angry, you wouldn’t like me when I’m angry: volitional choices to act or inhibit are modulated by subliminal perception of emotional faces

Volitional action and self-control—feelings of acting according to one’s own intentions and in being control of one’s own actions—are fundamental aspects of human conscious experience. However, it is unknown whether high-level cognitive control mechanisms are affected by socially salient but nonconscious emotional cues. In this study, we manipulated free choice decisions to act or withhold an action by subliminally presenting emotional faces: In a novel version of the Go/NoGo paradigm, participants made speeded button-press responses to Go targets, withheld responses to NoGo targets, and made spontaneous, free choices to execute or withhold the response for Choice targets. Before each target, we presented emotional faces, backwards masked to render them nonconscious. In Intentional trials, subliminal angry faces made participants more likely to voluntarily withhold the action, whereas fearful and happy faces had no effects. In a second experiment, the faces were made supraliminal, which eliminated the effects of angry faces on volitional choices. A third experiment measured neural correlates of the effects of subliminal angry faces on intentional choice using EEG. After replicating the behavioural results found in Experiment 1, we identified a frontal-midline theta component—associated with cognitive control processes—which is present for volitional decisions, and is modulated by subliminal angry faces. This suggests a mechanism whereby subliminally presented “threat” stimuli affect conscious control processes. In summary, nonconscious perception of angry faces increases choices to inhibit, and subliminal influences on volitional action are deep seated and ecologically embedded

Distraction and target selection in the brain:An fMRI study

To attend successfully, a specification of what is currently relevant is necessary, but not sufficient. Irrelevant stimuli that are also present in the environment must be recognized as such and filtered out at the same time. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging, we showed that posterior brain regions in parietal, occipital and temporal cortex are recruited in order to ignore distracting visual stimuli, while the specification and selection of relevant stimuli is associated with differential activity in frontal cortex and hippocampal areas instead. The results thus suggest that the selection of relevant objects can be anatomically dissociated from the handling of competing irrelevant objects. The dissociation between the increased involvement of parietal and occipital cortex in handling distraction on one hand, and that of frontal cortex in target specification on the other provides neurophysiological support for models of attention that make this functional distinction. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved