Skip Nav Destination
Close Modal
Update search
NARROW
Format
Journal
Date
Availability
1-4 of 4
Tobias Feldmann-Wüstefeld
Close
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account
Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Sort by
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (2020) 32 (3): 558–569.
Published: 01 March 2020
FIGURES
| View All (5)
Abstract
View article
PDF
Working memory maintains information so that it can be used in complex cognitive tasks. A key challenge for this system is to maintain relevant information in the face of task-irrelevant perturbations. Across two experiments, we investigated the impact of task-irrelevant interruptions on neural representations of working memory. We recorded EEG activity in humans while they performed a working memory task. On a subset of trials, we interrupted participants with salient but task-irrelevant objects. To track the impact of these task-irrelevant interruptions on neural representations of working memory, we measured two well-characterized, temporally sensitive EEG markers that reflect active, prioritized working memory representations: the contralateral delay activity and lateralized alpha power (8–12 Hz). After interruption, we found that contralateral delay activity amplitude momentarily sustained but was gone by the end of the trial. Lateralized alpha power was immediately influenced by the interrupters but recovered by the end of the trial. This suggests that dissociable neural processes contribute to the maintenance of working memory information and that brief irrelevant onsets disrupt two distinct online aspects of working memory. In addition, we found that task expectancy modulated the timing and magnitude of how these two neural signals responded to task-irrelevant interruptions, suggesting that the brain's response to task-irrelevant interruption is shaped by task context.
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (2020) 32 (2): 272–282.
Published: 01 February 2020
FIGURES
| View All (5)
Abstract
View article
PDF
Voluntary control over spatial attention has been likened to the operation of a zoom lens, such that processing quality declines as the size of the attended region increases, with a gradient of performance that peaks at the center of the selected area. Although concurrent changes in activity in visual regions suggest that zoom lens adjustments influence perceptual stages of processing, extant work has not distinguished between changes in the spatial selectivity of attention-driven neural activity and baseline shift of activity that can increase mean levels of activity without changes in selectivity. Here, we distinguished between these alternatives by measuring EEG activity in humans to track preparatory changes in alpha activity that indexed the precise topography of attention across the possible target positions. We observed increased spatial selectivity in alpha activity when observers voluntarily directed attention toward a narrower region of space, a pattern that was mirrored in target discrimination accuracy. Thus, alpha activity tracks both the centroid and spatial extent of covert spatial attention before the onset of the target display, lending support to the hypothesis that narrowing the zoom lens of attention shapes the initial encoding of sensory information.
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (2020) 32 (2): 367–377.
Published: 01 February 2020
FIGURES
| View All (4)
Abstract
View article
PDF
Our visual system is constantly confronted with more information than it can process. To deal with the limited capacity, attention allows us to enhance relevant information and suppress irrelevant information. Particularly, the suppression of salient irrelevant stimuli has shown to be important as it prevents attention to be captured and thus attentional resources to be wasted. This study aimed at directly connecting failures to suppress distraction with a neural marker of suppression, the distractor positivity (Pd). We measured participants' EEG signal while they performed a visual search task in which they had to report a digit inside a shape target while ignoring distractors, one of which could be a salient color singleton. Reports of target digits served as a behavioral index of enhancement, and reports of color distractor digits served as a behavioral index of failed suppression, each measured against reports of neutral distractor digits serving as a baseline. Participants reported the target identity more often than any distractor identity. The singleton identity was reported least often, suggesting suppression of the singleton below baseline. Suppression of salient stimuli was absent in the beginning and then increased throughout the experiment. When the singleton identity was reported, the Pd was observed in a later time window, suggesting that behavioral errors were preceded by failed suppression. Our results provide evidence for the signal suppression hypothesis that states salient items have to be actively suppressed to avoid attentional capture. Our results also provide direct evidence that the Pd is reflecting such active suppression.
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (2018) 30 (8): 1185–1196.
Published: 01 August 2018
FIGURES
| View All (4)
Abstract
View article
PDF
Contralateral delay activity (CDA) has long been argued to track the number of items stored in visual working memory (WM). Recently, however, Berggren and Eimer [Berggren, N., & Eimer, M. Does contralateral delay activity reflect working memory storage or the current focus of spatial attention within visual working memory? Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 28, 2003–2020, 2016] proposed the alternative hypothesis that the CDA tracks the current focus of spatial attention instead of WM storage. This hypothesis was based on the finding that, when two successive arrays of memoranda were placed in opposite hemifields, CDA amplitude was primarily determined by the position and number of items in the second display, not the total memory load across both displays. Here, we considered the alternative interpretation that participants dropped the first array from WM when they encoded the second array because the format of the probe display was spatially incompatible with the initial sample display. In this case, even if the CDA indexes active storage rather than spatial attention, CDA activity would be determined by the second array. We tested this idea by directly manipulating the spatial compatibility of sample and probe displays. With spatially incompatible displays, we replicated Berggren and Eimer's findings. However, with spatially compatible displays, we found clear evidence that CDA activity tracked the full storage load across both arrays, in line with a WM storage account of CDA activity. We propose that expectations of display compatibility influenced whether participants viewed the arrays as parts of a single extended event or two independent episodes. Thus, these findings raise interesting new questions about how event boundaries may shape the interplay between passive and active representations of task-relevant information.