Attenuation of neural responses in primary visual cortex during the attentional blink

Information-processing bottlenecks are characteristic of many cognitive and neural systems. One such bottleneck is revealed by tasks in which rapidly successive stimulus events must be reported. Here, observers missed the second of two visual targets if it occurred within 700 ms of the first [an "attentional blink" (AB)], even though this second target could be reported accurately when the first item was ignored. Isolating neural responses to such rapid events has proven difficult because current magnetic resonance imaging methods rely on relatively sluggish changes in the brain's physiological response to sensory inputs. Here, we overcame this limitation by presenting successive visual targets at different spatial locations, thereby exploiting the retinotopic organization of early cortical visual areas to distinguish neural activity associated with successive target events. We show that neural activity in primary visual cortex is significantly modulated during the AB, and that this activity mirrors behavioral measures of target identification accuracy. The findings suggest that the neural signature of perceptual suppression during processing of rapidly successive stimuli is evident at the earliest stages of cortical sensory processing

The shape of motion perception: Global pooling of transformational apparent motion

Transformational apparent motion (TAM) is a visual phenomenon highlighting the utility of form information in motion processing. In TAM, smooth apparent motion is perceived when shapes in certain spatiotemporal arrangements change. It has been argued tha

How Does Information Processing Speed Relate to the Attentional Blink?

Background When observers are asked to identify two targets in rapid sequence, they often suffer profound performance deficits for the second target, even when the spatial location of the targets is known. This attentional blink (AB) is usually attributed to the time required to process a previous target, implying that a link should exist between individual differences in information processing speed and the AB. Methodology/Principal Findings The present work investigated this question by examining the relationship between a rapid automatized naming task typically used to assess information-processing speed and the magnitude of the AB. The results indicated that faster processing actually resulted in a greater AB, but only when targets were presented amongst high similarity distractors. When target-distractor similarity was minimal, processing speed was unrelated to the AB. Conclusions/Significance Our findings indicate that information-processing speed is unrelated to target processing efficiency per se, but rather to individual differences in observers' ability to suppress distractors. This is consistent with evidence that individuals who are able to avoid distraction are more efficient at deploying temporal attention, but argues against a direct link between general processing speed and efficient information selection

Building a transdisciplinary expert consensus on the cognitive drivers of performance under pressure: An international multi-panel Delphi study

IntroductionThe ability to perform optimally under pressure is critical across many occupations, including the military, first responders, and competitive sport. Despite recognition that such performance depends on a range of cognitive factors, how common these factors are across performance domains remains unclear. The current study sought to integrate existing knowledge in the performance field in the form of a transdisciplinary expert consensus on the cognitive mechanisms that underlie performance under pressure.MethodsInternational experts were recruited from four performance domains [(i) Defense; (ii) Competitive Sport; (iii) Civilian High-stakes; and (iv) Performance Neuroscience]. Experts rated constructs from the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) framework (and several expert-suggested constructs) across successive rounds, until all constructs reached consensus for inclusion or were eliminated. Finally, included constructs were ranked for their relative importance.ResultsSixty-eight experts completed the first Delphi round, with 94% of experts retained by the end of the Delphi process. The following 10 constructs reached consensus across all four panels (in order of overall ranking): (1) Attention; (2) Cognitive Control—Performance Monitoring; (3) Arousal and Regulatory Systems—Arousal; (4) Cognitive Control—Goal Selection, Updating, Representation, and Maintenance; (5) Cognitive Control—Response Selection and Inhibition/Suppression; (6) Working memory—Flexible Updating; (7) Working memory—Active Maintenance; (8) Perception and Understanding of Self—Self-knowledge; (9) Working memory—Interference Control, and (10) Expert-suggested—Shifting.DiscussionOur results identify a set of transdisciplinary neuroscience-informed constructs, validated through expert consensus. This expert consensus is critical to standardizing cognitive assessment and informing mechanism-targeted interventions in the broader field of human performance optimization

Evidence for deficits in the temporal attention span of poor readers.

While poor reading is often associated with phonological deficits, many studies suggest that visual processing might also be impaired. In particular, recent research has indicated that poor readers show impaired spatial visual attention spans in partial and whole report tasks. Given the similarities between competition-based accounts for reduced visual attention span and similar explanations for impairments in sequential object processing, the present work examined whether poor readers show deficits in their "temporal attention span"--that is, their ability to rapidly and accurately process sequences of consecutive target items.Poor and normal readers monitored a sequential stream of visual items for two (TT condition) or three (TTT condition) consecutive target digits. Target identification was examined using both unconditional and conditional measures of accuracy in order to gauge the overall likelihood of identifying a target and the likelihood of identifying a target given successful identification of previous items. Compared to normal readers, poor readers showed small but consistent deficits in identification across targets whether unconditional or conditional accuracy was used. Additionally, in the TTT condition, final-target conditional accuracy was poorer than unconditional accuracy, particularly for poor readers, suggesting a substantial cost arising from processing the previous two targets that was not present in normal readers.Mirroring the differences found between poor and normal readers in spatial visual attention span, the present findings suggest two principal differences between the temporal attention spans of poor and normal readers. First, the consistent pattern of reduced performance across targets suggests increased competition amongst items within the same span for poor readers. Second, the steeper decline in final target performance amongst poor readers in the TTT condition suggests a reduction in the extent of their temporal attention span

Schematic diagram of TT, TDT, and TTT conditions (not to scale).

<p>Schematic diagram of TT, TDT, and TTT conditions (not to scale).</p

Mean Age, IQ, and RAN scores (in seconds) as a function of reading group (poor vs. normal).

<p>Numbers in parentheses indicate standard error.</p