Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 2021
Prominent models of control assume that conflict and the probability of conflict are signals used... more Prominent models of control assume that conflict and the probability of conflict are signals used by control processes that regulate attention. For example, when conflict is frequent across preceding trials (i.e., high probability of conflict), control processes bias attention toward goal-relevant information on subsequent trials. An important but underspecified question regards the metacontrol property of timescale-that is, how far back does the control system "look" to determine the probability of conflict? To address this question, Aben, Verguts, and Van den Bussche (2017) developed a statistical model quantifying the timescale of control. In a flanker task, they observed short timescales for lists with a low probability of conflict (which induce reactive control) and long timescales for lists with a high probability of conflict (which induce proactive control). To investigate the domain generality of these timescales, we applied their model to two additional conflict tasks that manipulated the list-wide probability of conflict. Our findings replicated Aben et al. suggesting meta-control may be task general with respect to timescales operating on the list level. We subsequently modified their model to examine timescale differences for items in the same list that differed in their probability of conflict but not the type of control engaged. We failed to detect a difference in timescales between items. Collectively, the findings demonstrate that differences in the timescale of control are task general and suggest that timescale differences are driven by the type of control engaged and not by the probability of conflict per se.
Much research has shown that humans can allocate attentional control differentially to multiple l... more Much research has shown that humans can allocate attentional control differentially to multiple locations based on the amount of conflict historically associated with a given location. Additionally, once established, these control settings can transfer to nearby locations that themselves have no conflict bias. Here we examined if these control settings also extend to nearby locations that are presented outside of the original frame of reference of biased stimuli. During training, participants first responded to biased flanker stimuli that were likely high conflict in one location and low conflict in another location. Then they were exposed to two sets of unbiased stimuli presented in novel transfer locations outside of the established reference frame of biased stimuli. Across three experiments, attentional control settings transferred beyond the reference frame including when there was a visual border (Experiment 2) or meaningful categorical distinction (Experiment 3) delineating training and transfer locations. These novel findings further support the idea that stimulus-driven attention control can be flexibly allocated, perhaps in a categorical manner.
Uploads
Papers by Abhishek Dey