Search

Limited attention capacity results that not all the stimuli present in the visual field are equally processed. While processing of salient stimuli is automatically boosted by bottom‑up attention, processing of task‑relevant stimuli can be boosted volitionally by top‑down attention. Usually, both top‑down and bottom‑up influences are present simultaneously, which creates a competition between these two types of attention. We examined this competition using both behavioral and electrophysiological measures. Participants responded to letters superimposed on background pictures. We assumed that responding to different conditions of the letter task engages top‑down attention to different extent, whereas processing of background pictures of varying salience engages bottom‑up attention to different extent. To check how manipulation of top‑down attention influences bottom‑up processing, we measured evoked response potentials (ERPs) in response to pictures (engaging mostly bottom‑up attention) during three conditions of a letter task (different levels of top‑down engagement). Conversely, to check how manipulation of bottom‑up attention influences top‑down processing, we measured ERP responses for letters (engaging mostly top‑down attention) while manipulating the salience of background pictures (different levels of bottom‑up engagement). The correctness and reaction times in response to letters were also analyzed. As expected, most of the ERPs and behavioral measures revealed a trade‑off between both types of processing: a decrease of bottom‑up processing was associated with an increase of top‑down processing and, similarly, a decrease of top‑down processing was associated with an increase in bottom‑up processing. Results proved competition between the two types of attentions.

Limited attention capacity results that not all the stimuli present in the visual field are equally processed. While processing of salient stimuli is automatically boosted by bottom‑up attention, processing of task‑relevant stimuli can be boosted volitionally by top‑down attention. Usually, both top‑down and bottom‑up influences are present simultaneously, which creates a competition between these two types of attention. We examined this competition using both behavioral and electrophysiological measures. Participants responded to letters superimposed on background pictures. We assumed that responding to different conditions of the letter task engages top‑down attention to different extent, whereas processing of background pictures of varying salience engages bottom‑up attention to different extent. To check how manipulation of top‑down attention influences bottom‑up processing, we measured evoked response potentials (ERPs) in response to pictures (engaging mostly bottom‑up attention) during three conditions of a letter task (different levels of top‑down engagement). Conversely, to check how manipulation of bottom‑up attention influences top‑down processing, we measured ERP responses for letters (engaging mostly top‑down attention) while manipulating the salience of background pictures (different levels of bottom‑up engagement). The correctness and reaction times in response to letters were also analyzed. As expected, most of the ERPs and behavioral measures revealed a trade‑off between both types of processing: a decrease of bottom‑up processing was associated with an increase of top‑down processing and, similarly, a decrease of top‑down processing was associated with an increase in bottom‑up processing. Results proved competition between the two types of attentions.