High perceptual load makes everybody equal: eliminating individual differences in distractibility with load

Perceptual load has been found to be a powerful determinant of distractibility in laboratory tasks. The present study assessed how the effects of perceptual load on distractibility in the laboratory relate to individual differences in the likelihood of distractibility in daily life. Sixty-one subjects performed a response-competition task in which perceptual load was varied. As expected, individuals reporting high levels of distractibility (on the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire, an established measure of distractibility in daily life) experienced greater distractor interference than did individuals reporting low levels. The critical finding, however, was that this relationship was confined to task conditions of low perceptual load: High perceptual load reduced distractor interference for all subjects, eliminating any individual differences. These findings suggest that the level of perceptual load in a task can predict whether individual differences in distractibility will be found and that high-load modifications of daily tasks may prove useful in preventing unwanted consequences of high distractibility

Negative affective state mimics effects of perceptual load on spatial perception

Recent electrophysiological evidence has shown that perceptual load and negative affective state can produce very similar, early-attention gating effects in early visual areas, modulating the processing of peripheral stimuli. Here we assessed the question of whether or not these modulatory effects of perceptual load and negative affect (NA) lead to comparable changes in spatial perception abilities, which could be captured at the behavioral level. High perceptual load at fixation impaired the precise spatial localization of peripheral textures, relative to a low perceptual load condition. By contrast, the coarse spatial encoding of these peripheral stimuli was not load-dependent, under neutral affective conditions. The transient experience of NA was induced in an independent sample of participants, who showed decreased performance in the localization task, even at a low perceptual-load level. These results were observed in the absence of any systematic eye movement toward the peripheral textures. These findings suggest that spatial location perception is an attention-dependent, as well as state-dependent process, in the sense that NA, very much like load, can dynamically shape early spatial perceptual abilities. Although NA mimics load during spatial localization, we discuss the possibility that these two effects likely depend upon nonoverlapping brain networks

High Perceptual Load Makes Monocular Attention Different

Attention is a fundamental function of the human which is important in our daily life. Perceptual load is thought to play an important role in selective attention^1,2^. When perceptual load is high, the distracting information will be kept out of perception and will not affect us. When perceptual load is low, the distracting information will be processed deeply by us and will influence us^3^. However, most of the past research was concerned with binocular attention instead of monocular attention. In spite of the differences such as visual acuity^4^, stereopsis^5,6^ between binocular and monocular vision, there were few reports of their difference regarding to perceptual load which means more items and features in our research. Here we show their difference with the application of perceptual load to a selective attention task adapted from Eriksen's flanker task^7^. According to our research, monocular subjects are more sensitive to perceptual load with a lower perceptual load keeping them from the distracting effect. The difference may be attributed to less perceptual capacity rather than better attention of monocular vision. The research revealed a difference between binocular and monocular perceptual capacity and provides a new perspective to study the neural mechanism of perceptual capacity

Perceptual biases and positive schizotypy: The role of perceptual load

The study investigated the effects of perceptual load on the bias to report seeing non-existing events—a bias associated with positive symptoms of schizophrenia and positive schizotypal symptoms. Undergraduate students completed psychometric measures of schizotypy and were asked to detect fast moving words among non-words under different levels of perceptual load. Perceptual load was manipulated through stimulus motion. Overall, the results showed that the higher the perceptual load, the stronger the bias to report seeing words in non-word trials. However, the observed bias was associated with positive schizotypy (Unusual Experiences) only when visual detection was performed under conditions of medium perceptual load. \ud No schizotypy measure was associated with accuracy. The results suggest that, although some amount of perceptual ambiguity seems to be necessary for schizotypal bias generation, an increase in the perceptual load can inhibit this process possibly by preventing perception of task-irrelevant internal events, such as loose word associations. \ud \u

Auditory Distractors in the Visual Modality: No Evidence for Perceptual Load Hypothesis or Auditory Dominance

Attention is a valuable resource with limited capacity, so knowing what will distract us during important tasks can be crucial in life. There is a lot of support for the Perceptual Load Hypothesis (PLH) when examining visual distractibility; however, less research has examined if PLH can predict auditory distractibility. Participants in the current study completed three experiments using visual selective attention tasks while being presented with auditory and visual distractions under low/high perceptual loads. In Experiment 1, I took the visual selective attention task from Robinson et al. (2018) and shortened the stimulus presentation while adding a no distractor baseline condition. In Experiment 2, I increased auditory distractor effects by requiring participants to periodically respond to the auditory information. In Experiment 3, I added a working memory task to increase cognitive load. Results showed no support for PLH with auditory distractors in Experiments 1 or 2, and instead showed the opposite pattern, with auditory distractors having a larger effect under high perceptual load (Experiment 2). Results from Experiment 3 show that increasing cognitive load had no effect on distractibility, which suggests the results from Experiment 2 were caused by periodically responding to the auditory stimuli. These findings have important implications for our understanding of selective attention and shed light on tasks that require the processing of multisensory information.No embargoAcademic Major: Psycholog

A crossmodal crossover: opposite effects of visual and auditory perceptual load on steady-state evoked potentials to irrelevant visual stimuli

Mechanisms of attention are required to prioritise goal-relevant sensory events under conditions of stimulus competition. According to the perceptual load model of attention, the extent to which task-irrelevant inputs are processed is determined by the relative demands of discriminating the target: the more perceptually demanding the target task, the less unattended stimuli will be processed. Although much evidence supports the perceptual load model for competing stimuli within a single sensory modality, the effects of perceptual load in one modality on distractor processing in another is less clear. Here we used steady-state evoked potentials (SSEPs) to measure neural responses to irrelevant visual checkerboard stimuli while participants performed either a visual or auditory task that varied in perceptual load. Consistent with perceptual load theory, increasing visual task load suppressed SSEPs to the ignored visual checkerboards. In contrast, increasing auditory task load enhanced SSEPs to the ignored visual checkerboards. This enhanced neural response to irrelevant visual stimuli under auditory load suggests that exhausting capacity within one modality selectively compromises inhibitory processes required for filtering stimuli in another

Visual perceptual load reduces auditory detection in typically developing individuals but not in individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorders

Objective: Previous studies examining selective attention in individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) have yielded conflicting results, some suggesting superior focused attention (e.g. on visual search tasks), others demonstrating greater distractibility. This pattern could be accounted for by the proposal (derived by applying the Load theory of attention, e.g. Lavie, 2005) that ASD is characterized by an increased perceptual capacity (Remington, Swettenham, Campbell, & Coleman, 2009). Recent studies in the visual domain support this proposal. Here we hypothesize that ASD involves an enhanced perceptual capacity that also operates across sensory modalities, and test this prediction, for the first time using a signal detection paradigm. Method: 17 neurotypical (NT) and 15 ASD adolescents performed a visual search task under varying levels of visual perceptual load while simultaneously detecting presence/absence of an auditory tone embedded in noise. Results: Detection sensitivity (d’) for the auditory stimulus was similarly high for both groups in the low visual perceptual load condition (e.g. 2 items: p = .391, d = 0.31, 95% CI [-.39, 1.00]). However, at a higher level of visual load, auditory d’ reduced for the NT group but not the ASD group leading to a group difference (p = .002, d = 1.2, 95% CI [.44, 1.96]). As predicted, when visual perceptual load was highest, both groups then showed a similarly low auditory d’ (p = .9, d = 0.05, 95% CI [-.65, .74]). Conclusions: These findings demonstrate that increased perceptual capacity in ASD operates across modalities

The influence of schizotypal traits on attention under high perceptual load

Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders (SSD) are known to be characterised by abnormalities in attentional processes, but there are inconsistencies in the literature that remain unresolved. This article considers whether perceptual resource limitations play a role in moderating attentional abnormalities in SSD. According to perceptual load theory, perceptual resource limitations can lead to attenuated or superior performance on dual-task paradigms depending on whether participants are required to process, or attempt to ignore, secondary stimuli. If SSD is associated with perceptual resource limitations, and if it represents the extreme end of an otherwise normally distributed neuropsychological phenotype, schizotypal traits in the general population should lead to disproportionate performance costs on dual-task paradigms as a function of the perceptual task demands. To test this prediction, schizotypal traits were quantified via the Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire (SPQ) in 74 healthy volunteers, who also completed a dual-task signal detection paradigm that required participants to detect central and peripheral stimuli across conditions that varied in the overall number of stimuli presented. The results confirmed decreasing performance as the perceptual load of the task increased. More importantly, significant correlations between SPQ scores and task performance confirmed that increased schizotypal traits, particularly in the cognitive-perceptual domain, are associated with greater performance decrements under increasing perceptual load. These results confirm that attentional difficulties associated with SSD extend sub-clinically into the general population and suggest that cognitive-perceptual schizotypal traits may represent a risk factor for difficulties in the regulation of attention under increasing perceptual load

Inattentional Deafness: Visual Load Leads to Time-Specific Suppression of Auditory Evoked Responses

UNLABELLED: Due to capacity limits on perception, conditions of high perceptual load lead to reduced processing of unattended stimuli (Lavie et al., 2014). Accumulating work demonstrates the effects of visual perceptual load on visual cortex responses, but the effects on auditory processing remain poorly understood. Here we establish the neural mechanisms underlying "inattentional deafness"--the failure to perceive auditory stimuli under high visual perceptual load. Participants performed a visual search task of low (target dissimilar to nontarget items) or high (target similar to nontarget items) load. On a random subset (50%) of trials, irrelevant tones were presented concurrently with the visual stimuli. Brain activity was recorded with magnetoencephalography, and time-locked responses to the visual search array and to the incidental presence of unattended tones were assessed. High, compared to low, perceptual load led to increased early visual evoked responses (within 100 ms from onset). This was accompanied by reduced early (∼ 100 ms from tone onset) auditory evoked activity in superior temporal sulcus and posterior middle temporal gyrus. A later suppression of the P3 "awareness" response to the tones was also observed under high load. A behavioral experiment revealed reduced tone detection sensitivity under high visual load, indicating that the reduction in neural responses was indeed associated with reduced awareness of the sounds. These findings support a neural account of shared audiovisual resources, which, when depleted under load, leads to failures of sensory perception and awareness. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: The present work clarifies the neural underpinning of inattentional deafness under high visual load. The findings of near-simultaneous load effects on both visual and auditory evoked responses suggest shared audiovisual processing capacity. Temporary depletion of shared capacity in perceptually demanding visual tasks leads to a momentary reduction in sensory processing of auditory stimuli, resulting in inattentional deafness. The dynamic "push-pull" pattern of load effects on visual and auditory processing furthers our understanding of both the neural mechanisms of attention and of cross-modal effects across visual and auditory processing. These results also offer an explanation for many previous failures to find cross-modal effects in experiments where the visual load effects may not have coincided directly with auditory sensory processing