Joann Huizhen Tang , Selina S. Solomon , Adam Kohn , Elyse S. Sussman
{"title":"在处理视觉输入的时间模式时区分期望效应和注意效应","authors":"Joann Huizhen Tang , Selina S. Solomon , Adam Kohn , Elyse S. Sussman","doi":"10.1016/j.bandc.2024.106228","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The current study investigated how the brain sets up expectations from stimulus regularities by evaluating the neural responses to expectations driven implicitly (by the stimuli themselves) and explicitly (by task demands). How the brain uses prior information to create expectations and what role attention plays in forming or holding predictions to efficiently respond to incoming sensory information is still debated. We presented temporal patterns of visual input while recording EEG under two different task conditions. When the patterns were task-relevant and pattern recognition was required to perform the button press task, three different event-related brain potentials (ERPs) were elicited, each reflecting a different aspect of pattern expectation. In contrast, when the patterns were task-irrelevant, none of the neural indicators of pattern recognition or pattern violation detection were observed to the same temporally structured sequences. Thus, results revealed a clear distinction between expectation and attention that was prompted by task requirements. These results provide complementary pieces of evidence that implicit exposure to a stimulus pattern may not be sufficient to drive neural effects of expectations that lead to predictive error responses. Task-driven attentional control can dissociate from stimulus-driven expectations, to effectively minimize distracting information and maximize attentional regulation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":55331,"journal":{"name":"Brain and Cognition","volume":"182 ","pages":"Article 106228"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Distinguishing expectation and attention effects in processing temporal patterns of visual input\",\"authors\":\"Joann Huizhen Tang , Selina S. Solomon , Adam Kohn , Elyse S. Sussman\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.bandc.2024.106228\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>The current study investigated how the brain sets up expectations from stimulus regularities by evaluating the neural responses to expectations driven implicitly (by the stimuli themselves) and explicitly (by task demands). How the brain uses prior information to create expectations and what role attention plays in forming or holding predictions to efficiently respond to incoming sensory information is still debated. We presented temporal patterns of visual input while recording EEG under two different task conditions. When the patterns were task-relevant and pattern recognition was required to perform the button press task, three different event-related brain potentials (ERPs) were elicited, each reflecting a different aspect of pattern expectation. In contrast, when the patterns were task-irrelevant, none of the neural indicators of pattern recognition or pattern violation detection were observed to the same temporally structured sequences. Thus, results revealed a clear distinction between expectation and attention that was prompted by task requirements. These results provide complementary pieces of evidence that implicit exposure to a stimulus pattern may not be sufficient to drive neural effects of expectations that lead to predictive error responses. Task-driven attentional control can dissociate from stimulus-driven expectations, to effectively minimize distracting information and maximize attentional regulation.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55331,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Brain and Cognition\",\"volume\":\"182 \",\"pages\":\"Article 106228\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Brain and Cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278262624001052\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brain and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278262624001052","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Distinguishing expectation and attention effects in processing temporal patterns of visual input
The current study investigated how the brain sets up expectations from stimulus regularities by evaluating the neural responses to expectations driven implicitly (by the stimuli themselves) and explicitly (by task demands). How the brain uses prior information to create expectations and what role attention plays in forming or holding predictions to efficiently respond to incoming sensory information is still debated. We presented temporal patterns of visual input while recording EEG under two different task conditions. When the patterns were task-relevant and pattern recognition was required to perform the button press task, three different event-related brain potentials (ERPs) were elicited, each reflecting a different aspect of pattern expectation. In contrast, when the patterns were task-irrelevant, none of the neural indicators of pattern recognition or pattern violation detection were observed to the same temporally structured sequences. Thus, results revealed a clear distinction between expectation and attention that was prompted by task requirements. These results provide complementary pieces of evidence that implicit exposure to a stimulus pattern may not be sufficient to drive neural effects of expectations that lead to predictive error responses. Task-driven attentional control can dissociate from stimulus-driven expectations, to effectively minimize distracting information and maximize attentional regulation.
期刊介绍:
Brain and Cognition is a forum for the integration of the neurosciences and cognitive sciences. B&C publishes peer-reviewed research articles, theoretical papers, case histories that address important theoretical issues, and historical articles into the interaction between cognitive function and brain processes. The focus is on rigorous studies of an empirical or theoretical nature and which make an original contribution to our knowledge about the involvement of the nervous system in cognition. Coverage includes, but is not limited to memory, learning, emotion, perception, movement, music or praxis in relationship to brain structure or function. Published articles will typically address issues relating some aspect of cognitive function to its neurological substrates with clear theoretical import, formulating new hypotheses or refuting previously established hypotheses. Clinical papers are welcome if they raise issues of theoretical importance or concern and shed light on the interaction between brain function and cognitive function. We welcome review articles that clearly contribute a new perspective or integration, beyond summarizing the literature in the field; authors of review articles should make explicit where the contribution lies. We also welcome proposals for special issues on aspects of the relation between cognition and the structure and function of the nervous system. Such proposals can be made directly to the Editor-in-Chief from individuals interested in being guest editors for such collections.