Search

Number processing induces spatial attention shifts to the left or right side for small or large numbers, respectively. This spatial-numerical association (SNA) extends to mental calculation, such that subtractions and additions induce left or right biases, respectively. However, the time course of activating SNAs during mental calculation is unclear. Here, we addressed this issue by measuring visual position discrimination during auditory calculation. Thirty-four healthy adults listened in each trial to five successive elements of arithmetic facts (first operand, operator, second operand, equal and result) and verbally classified their correctness. After each element (except for the result), a fixation dot moved equally often to either the left or right side and participants pressed left or right buttons to discriminate its movement direction (four times per trial). First and second operand magnitude (small/large), operation (addition/subtraction), result correctness (right/wrong) and movement direction (left/right) were balanced across 128 trials. Manual reaction times of dot movement discriminations were considered in relation to previous arithmetic elements. We found no evidence of early attentional shifts after first operand and operator presentation. Discrimination performance was modulated consistent with SNAs after the second operand, suggesting that attentional shifts occur once there is access to all elements necessary to complete an arithmetic operation. Such late-occurring attention shifts may reflect a combination of multiple element-specific biases and confirm their functional role in mental calculation.

This study investigated whether the visual and auditory Simon effects could be accounted for by the same mechanism. In a single experiment, we performed a detailed comparison of the visual and the auditory Simon effects arising in behavioural responses and in pupil dilation, a psychophysiological measure considered as a marker of the cognitive effort induced by conflict processing. To address our question, we performed sequential and distributional analyses on both reaction times and pupil dilation. Results confirmed that the mechanisms underlying the visual and auditory Simon effects are functionally equivalent in terms of the interaction between unconditional and conditional response processes. The two modalities, however, differ with respect to the strength of their activation and inhibition. Importantly, pupillary data mirrored the pattern observed in behavioural data for both tasks, adding physiological evidence to the current literature on the processing of visual and auditory information in a conflict task.

The Simon effect lies on the automatic generation of a stimulus spatial code, which, however, is not relevant for performing the task. Results typically show faster performance when stimulus and response locations correspond, rather than when they do not. Considering reaction time distributions, two types of Simon effect have been individuated, which are thought to depend on different mechanisms: visuomotor activation versus cognitive translation of spatial codes. The present study aimed to investigate whether the presence of a distractor, which affects the allocation of attentional resources and, thus, the time needed to generate the spatial code, changes the nature of the Simon effect. In four experiments, we manipulated the presence and the characteristics of the distractor. Findings extend previous evidence regarding the distinction between visuomotor activation and cognitive translation of spatial stimulus codes in a Simon task. They are discussed with reference to the attentional model of the Simon effect.

In the Simon effect performance is faster and more accurate when the task-irrelevant spatial dimension of the stimulus corresponds to the location of the response, compared to when they do not correspond. In the prosaccade-antisaccade effect the latencies of saccades away from the stimulus location (i.e., antisaccades) are slower than the latencies of saccades toward the stimulus location (i.e., prosaccades). Because these two effects share a similar basis, the study of the Simon effect with saccadic eye movements needs to be decoupled from the prosaccade-antisaccade effect. A standard Simon task (Experiment 1) and a Simon task in which a distractor stimulus was also presented (Experiment 2) were implemented. In Experiment 1, results showed an effect likely attributable to the sum of the Simon effect and the prosaccade-antisaccade effect. In Experiment 2, in which the difference between the prosaccade and antisaccade was eliminated, only a Simon effect, cognitive in nature, manifested itself.

In three experiments, we tested whether the amount of attentional resources needed to process a face displaying neutral/angry/fearful facial expressions with direct or averted gaze depends on task instructions, and face presentation. To this end, we used a Rapid Serial Visual Presentation paradigm in which participants in Experiment 1 were first explicitly asked to discriminate whether the expression of a target face (T1) with direct or averted gaze was angry or neutral, and then to judge the orientation of a landscape (T2). Experiment 2 was identical to Experiment 1 except that participants had to discriminate the gender of the face of T1 and fearful faces were also presented randomly inter-mixed within each block of trials. Experiment 3 differed from Experiment 2 only because angry and fearful faces were never presented within the same block. The findings indicated that the presence of the attentional blink (AB) for face stimuli depends on specific combinations of gaze direction and emotional facial expressions and crucially revealed that the contextual factors (e.g., explicit instruction to process the facial expression and the presence of other emotional faces) can modify and even reverse the AB, suggesting a flexible and more contextualized deployment of attentional resources in face processing.

The present study investigated if the gaze-cuing effect (i.e., the tendency for observers to respond faster to targets in locations that were cued by others' gaze direction than to not-cued targets) is modulated by the type of relationship (i.e., cooperative or competitive) established during a previous interaction with a cuing face. In two experiments, participants played a series of single-shot games of a modified version of the two-choice Prisoner's Dilemma against eight simulated contenders. They were shown a fictive feedback indicating if the opponents chose to cooperate or compete with them. Opponents' faces were then used as stimuli in a standard gaze-cuing task. In Experiment 1 females classified as average in competitiveness were tested, while in Experiment 2 females classified as high and low in competitiveness were tested. We found that only in females classified as low and average in competitiveness the gaze-cuing effect for competitive contenders was greater than for cooperative contenders. These findings suggest that competitive opponents represent a relevant source of information within the social environment and female observers with low and average levels of competition cannot prevent from keeping their eyes over them., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Gaze direction and facial expressions are critical components of face processing and have been shown to influence attention deployment. We investigated whether gaze direction (direct vs. averted) combined with a neutral or angry expression modulates the deployment of attentional resources over time. In a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) paradigm participants had to decide the gender of a neutral or an angry target face with direct or averted gaze (T1) and then to judge the orientation of a target picture of a landscape (T2), following the face at different time intervals. Results showed no attentional blink effect (i.e., no deterioration in T2 accuracy) when T1 was an angry face with direct gaze, whereas it was present for angry faces with averted gaze or neutral faces with either averted or direct gaze. These findings are consistent with appraisal theories and are discussed against the background of automatic processing of threat stimuli.

The Simon effect consists of a faster and a more accurate performance when spatial responses correspond to irrelevant-spatial stimuli than when they do not. The time course of the Simon effect was investigated using centrally presented conventional signals (arrows and spatial words) conveying spatial information through iconic-symbolic (Experiments 1 and 2) and semantic (Experiment 3) codes. Time-demanding object-inherent and semantic spatial codes were generated for arrows and words, respectively. This resulted in Simon effects increasing in size across increasing response times (RTs). However, different onsets of the Simon effect were displayed across RT distributions. For arrows, the Simon effect was already significant at the fastest RT intervals, providing clear evidence that they are distinctively more effective directional indicators compared to words.

In the present study we considered the two factors that have been advocated for playing a role in emotional attention: perception of gaze direction and facial expression of emotions. Participants performed an oculomotor task in which they had to make a saccade towards one of the two lateral targets, depending on the colour of the fixation dot which appeared at the centre of the computer screen. At different time intervals (stimulus onset asynchronies, SOAs: 50,100,150 ms) following the onset of the dot, a picture of a human face (gazing either to the right or to the left) was presented at the centre of the screen. The gaze direction of the face could be congruent or incongruent with respect to the location of the target, and the expression could be neutral or angry. In Experiment 1 the facial expressions were presented randomly in a single block, whereas in Experiment 2 they were shown in separate blocks. Latencies for correct saccades and percentage of errors (saccade direction errors) were considered in the analyses. Results showed that incongruent trials determined a significantly higher percentage of saccade direction errors with respect to congruent trials, thus confirming that gaze direction, even when task-irrelevant, interferes with the accuracy of the observer's oculomotor behaviour. The angry expression was found to hold attention for a longer time with respect to the neutral one, producing delayed saccade latencies. This was particularly evident at 100 ms SOA and for incongruent trials. Emotional faces may then exert a modulatory effect on overt attention mechanisms.

Recent studies suggest that covering the face inhibits the recognition of identity and emotional expressions. However, it might also make the eyes more salient, since they are a reliable index to orient our social and spatial attention. This study investigates (1) whether the pervasive interaction with people with face masks fostered by the COVID-19 pandemic modulates the processing of spatial information essential to shift attention according to other’s eye-gaze direction (i.e., gaze-cueing effect: GCE), and (2) whether this potential modulation interacts with motor responses (i.e., Simon effect). Participants were presented with face cues orienting their gaze to a congruent or incongruent target letter location (gaze-cueing paradigm) while wearing a surgical mask (Mask), a patch (Control), or nothing (No-Mask). The task required to discriminate the identity of the lateralized target letters by pressing one of two lateralized response keys, in a corresponding or a non-corresponding position with respect to the target. Results showed that GCE was not modulated by the presence of the Mask, but it occurred in the No-Mask condition, confirming previous studies. Crucially, the GCE interacted with Simon effect in the Mask and Control conditions, though in different ways. While in the Mask condition the GCE emerged only when target and response positions corresponded (i.e., Simoncorresponding trials), in the Control condition it emerged only when they did not correspond (i.e., Simon-non-corresponding trials). These results indicate that people with face masks induce us to jointly orient our visual attention in the direction of the seen gaze (GCE) in those conditions resembling (or associated with) a general approaching behavior (Simon-corresponding trials). This is likely promoted by the fact that we tend to perceive wearing the mask as a personal safety measure and, thus, someone wearing the face mask is perceived as a trustworthy person. In contrast, people with a patch on their face can be perceived as more threatening, therefore inducing a GCE in those conditions associated with a general avoidance behavior (Simon-noncorresponding trials). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Boxing athletes code the opponents' intention to act in advance to plan and perform the most appropriate counterattack responses; in contrast, non-athletes respond with a defence action (Ottoboni, Russo, Tessari, 2015). We investigated whether such difference is limited at elaborating the most appropriate motor response or relies on different visual and attentional strategies during the early visual analysis of the opponent. We recorded saccades as indexes of visual attentional orienting during an implicit paradigm (i.e., a Simon-like task): nine experienced boxers and nine controls observed photographs of boxing attacks (jab and cross) or a neutral position (guard) and judged the colour of body parts either salient or not for elaborating the attack action (gloves vs. shorts, respectively) by shifting their gaze towards one of two lateral response boxes. Release reaction times (i.e., time between the start of the first saccade away from the fixation rectangle toward the response box) were faster toward the arm that seemed about to attack for the jab stance (the most dynamic one as implying motion) when judging the glove colour in both athletes and controls. No effect emerged when focusing on the shorts that provide irrelevant information for elaborating a defence or attack action. Therefore, athletes and controls seem to use the same visual strategies (saccadic movements) when analysing the opponent's posture before acting. However, if expertise brings better motor response processing as previously found, the difference between athletes and non-athletes must lay in a later cognitive stage (other than the visual one) devoted to plane the most effective motor response. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]