Investigating the Temporal Course of Attentional Processing A Test of the Response-Retrieval Account of Negative Priming

Transcription

1 Investigating the Temporal Course of Attentional Processing A Test of the Response-Retrieval Account of Negative Priming Matthias Ihrke 1,3 Jörg Behrendt 1,2 Hecke Schrobsdorff 1,3 Michael Herrman 1,3 Marcus Hasselhorn 1,2 1 Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience Göttingen 2 Georg-Elias-Müller-Institute for Psychology, Göttingen 3 Max-Planck-Institute for Dynamics and Self-Organization, Göttingen Teap 2008 Marburg Matthias Ihrke (BCCN) Temporal Course of NP / 22

2 Outline 1 Negative Priming and Selective Attention 2 Experimental Method 3 Results 4 Conclusion & Outlook Matthias Ihrke (BCCN) Temporal Course of NP / 22

3 Negative Priming and Selective Attention Negative Priming Experimental Setup Trial n Trial n + 1 Ball Buch RSI ( ms) 500 ms time Response Keys no yes no yes Distractor red, Target green Compare the green object and the grey word. Response per keyboard (Yes/No) orthogonal variation of priming and response relation possible Matthias Ihrke (BCCN) Temporal Course of NP / 22

4 Negative Priming and Selective Attention Negative Priming Effect critical condition: Negative Priming Prime CO Probe Distractor object from prime trial reappears as Target in the probe NP longer reaction time ( ms) more behavioural errors Matthias Ihrke (BCCN) Temporal Course of NP / 22

5 Negative Priming and Selective Attention Other Priming-Conditions Prime CO Probe Ball Bus DT (NP) Nomenclature Ball TT (PP) Bus Prime Probe Label target target = TT (PP) Ball Bus distractor target = DT (NP) DD target distractor = TD Ball Bus distractor distractor = DD TD Ball Bus Matthias Ihrke (BCCN) Temporal Course of NP / 22

6 Negative Priming and Selective Attention Negative Priming Prime Probe ms 500 ms reaction stimulus onset response stimulus interval time Negative Priming is considered as the most direct indicator for attentional selection effect stems from ignored stimuli alone (as opposed to positive priming) very robust finding: different modalities (visual, auditory) different time scales (short-term vs. long-term NP) different experimental paradigms very sensitive to subtle, experimental manipulations (RSI, response,... ) Matthias Ihrke (BCCN) Temporal Course of NP / 22

7 Negative Priming and Selective Attention Theories diverse theoretical discussion: Selected Theories for NP 1 Inhibition (Tipper, 1985; Houghton & Tipper, 1994; Tipper, 2001) 2 Episodic-Retrieval Approach (Neill & Valdes, 1992; Neill, 1997) 3 Response-Retrieval (Rothermund, 2005) 4 Temporal-Discrimination (Milliken et al., 1998) 5 (C)ISAM (Schrobsdorff et al., 2007) 6... Negative Priming is a complex phenomenon that is difficult to explain Matthias Ihrke (BCCN) Temporal Course of NP / 22

8 Negative Priming and Selective Attention Theories Inhibition vs. Response-Retrieval target distractor Prime "Bank" retrieval Probe "Ball" conflict "Bank" time Inhibition inhibition of distractor items because of ignoring persisting inhibition delay when activating in probe Response-Retrieval retrieval of prime response in probe trial because of similarity NP depends on response (repeated or changed) Matthias Ihrke (BCCN) Temporal Course of NP / 22

9 Negative Priming and Selective Attention Time-Course of a single trial What happens during a trial? complex experimental setup multiple processes measure reaction time or error rate do not resolve when the effect is triggered Hypothetical Trial Processing Additive Model Matthias Ihrke (BCCN) Temporal Course of NP / 22

10 Negative Priming and Selective Attention Time-Course of a single trial What happens during a trial? complex experimental setup multiple processes measure reaction time or error rate do not resolve when the effect is triggered Hypothetical Trial Processing Additive Model Bus yes no target selection motor command response selection trial onset response time R ts R rs ζ Matthias Ihrke (BCCN) Temporal Course of NP / 22

11 Negative Priming and Selective Attention Time-Course of a single trial Predictions Bus yes no target selection motor command response selection trial onset response time R ts R rs ζ Predictions from the theories Inhibition slowdown in target-selection part of the processing (abstract representation is inhibited) Response-Retrieval slowdown in response-selection or motor-command since response is then determined Matthias Ihrke (BCCN) Temporal Course of NP / 22

12 Experimental Method Time-Course of a single trial Dividing the Trial introduce time-markers to analyse the processing during the trial eyemovement to distinguish target- and response-selection LRP for onset of motor command separate reaction times for target- and response-selection Matthias Ihrke (BCCN) Temporal Course of NP / 22

13 Experimental Method Time-Course of a single trial Dividing the Trial introduce time-markers to analyse the processing during the trial eyemovement to distinguish target- and response-selection LRP for onset of motor command eyemovement target selection trial onset motor command response selection response LRP separate reaction times for target- and response-selection time Matthias Ihrke (BCCN) Temporal Course of NP / 22

14 Experiment Two Conditions: Eyemovement Experimental Method Glance No-Glance attentional focus Bus attentional focus Eye-Movement (Glance) Bus N = 16 N = 16 Matthias Ihrke (BCCN) Temporal Course of NP / 22

15 Experimental Method Experimental Method Setup Experimental Setup 36 Trials Baseline (pre/post) single-objects 30 Trials Practicing phase 924 experimental Trials (11 blocks), randomized and equally distributed across conditions RSI randomized between 500 and 1500 ms 5 Priming-Conditions (next slide) 6 objects EEG-Acquisition 60 channels (extended System, w/o O1/O2) 4 EOG channels (left/right VEOG/HEOG) Reference FCz Matthias Ihrke (BCCN) Temporal Course of NP / 22

16 Glance-Extraction using EOG-data Experimental Method very reliable occurence of strong eyemovement (instruction) simple algorithm for extracting the glance 1 use signal s of one veog-channel and use sliding time-window where and W w (t) = sgn(τ max τ min ) s(τ max ) s(τ min ) τ max = arg max t S t,w and τ min = arg min S t,w t S t,w := {s(i) i {t,..., t + w}}. that gives largest difference between two points in time-window 2 find latency with largest movement as R = arg max t (W w (t)) 3 cross-validate with counter-lateral electrode Matthias Ihrke (BCCN) Temporal Course of NP / 22

17 100 Glance-Extraction using EOG-data 50 µv 0 Experimental Method very reliable occurence of strong eyemovement (instruction) 50 simple algorithm for extracting the glance W use signal s of w (t) s one veog-channel and use sliding time-window µv W w (t) = sgn(τ max τ min ) s(τ max ) s(τ min ) left veog Links unten where and right veog Rechts unten ms τ max = arg max t S t,w and τ min = arg min S t,w t S t,w := {s(i) i {t,..., t + w}}. that gives largest difference between two points in time-window 2 find latency with largest msmovement as R = arg max t (W w (t)) 3 cross-validate with counter-lateral electrode Matthias Ihrke (BCCN) Temporal Course of NP / 22

18 Experimental Method Experiment Summary: Design Design (IV s) 1 2 Between-subjects Conditions (Glance vs. No-Glance) 2 5 Priming (CO, DT, TD, DD, TT) 3 2 Response-repetition (repetition vs. change) DV s 1 Total Reaction Time (R) condition Glance : RT until Glance (R ts ) target selection RT from Glance to response (R rs ) response-selection LRP-onset not considered here 2 (Error rates) not reported Matthias Ihrke (BCCN) Temporal Course of NP / 22

19 Results Results Overall RT main effect glance vs. no-glance (trivial), F(1, 30) = 5.53, p <.03 interaction glance vs. priming F(4, 120) = 3.09, p <.02 No-Glance main effect priming, F(4, 60) = 2.64, p <.05 interaction priming response-repetition, F(4, 60) = 3.15, p <.03 pairwise comparisons not significant Glance main effect priming, F(4, 60) = 6.63, p <.001 main effect response-repetition, F(1, 15) = 19.48, p <.001 no priming response interaction Matthias Ihrke (BCCN) Temporal Course of NP / 22

20 Results Results Overall RT (a) condition no-glance (b) condition glance control different response same response baseline same response baseline different response + ** ** ** DT TT TD DD control DT TT TD ** ** DD Matthias Ihrke (BCCN) Temporal Course of NP / 22

21 Results Results Partial RTs Target Selection main effect priming condition for DT and TD, not for TT and DD target selection delayed for DT and TD Response Selection main effect priming condition only for TT response-selection faster for positive priming Negative priming effect due to slowing in target-selection Positive priming effect caused by faster response-selection Matthias Ihrke (BCCN) Temporal Course of NP / 22

22 Results Partial RTs Results Matthias Ihrke (BCCN) Temporal Course of NP / 22

23 Conclusion & Outlook Summary Summary pattern in no-glance condition largely in support for response-retrieval theory NP faster for response repetition, but slower for response-change glance-condition not consistent with response-retrieval only main effects of priming and response-repetition partial reaction times reveal: Negative priming effect occurs during target-selection Positive priming effect occurs during response-selection Matthias Ihrke (BCCN) Temporal Course of NP / 22

24 Conclusion & Outlook Conclusion & Outlook Conclusions response-retrieval effect only for no-glance caused by interaction between processes? partial RTs indicate that positive and negative priming are not caused by the same mechanism results more in accordance with the inhibition framework Future Work use LRP as time marker to further separate trial processing effect caused by response-selection (comparison) or later motor processes? analyze EEG-data for correlates of in early/late portions of the ERP Matthias Ihrke (BCCN) Temporal Course of NP / 22

25 Thank You Conclusion & Outlook... for your (selective) attention. Matthias Ihrke (BCCN) Temporal Course of NP / 22