Distraction impairs performance of many important, everyday tasks. Attentional control limits distraction by preferentially selecting important items for limited-capacity cognitive operations. Research in attentional control has typically investigated the degree to which selection of items is stimulus-driven versus goal-driven. Recent work finds that when observers initially learn a task, the selection is based on stimulus-driven factors, but through experience, goal-driven factors have an increasing influence. The modulation of selection by goals has been studied within the paradigm of learned distractor rejection, in which experience over a sequence of trials enables individuals eventually to ignore a perceptually salient distractor. The experiments presented examine whether observers can generalize learned distractor rejection to novel distractors. Observers searched for a target and ignored a salient color-singleton distractor that appeared in half of the trials. In Experiment 1, observers who learned distractor rejection in a variable environment rejected a novel distractor more effectively than observers who learned distractor rejection in a less variable, homogeneous environment, demonstrating that variable, heterogeneous stimulus environments encourage generalizable learned distractor rejection. Experiments 2 and 3 investigated the time course of learned distractor rejection across the experiment and found that after experiencing four color-singleton distractors in different blocks, observers could effectively reject subsequent novel color-singleton distractors. These results suggest that the optimization of attentional control to the task environment can be interpreted as a form of learning, demonstrating experience’s critical role in attentional control.

A broad survey of the aging and attention literature illustrates cognitive aging is complex and multifactorial. This chapter examines the interaction of aging and selective attention. It emphasizes the visual modality, focusing on several experimental methodologies used to quantify selective attention in the laboratory. The chapter also examines how observed patterns of behavior informed early models of attentional functioning in aging adults. It explores the overarching theme that changes in processing speed and explains behavioral performance patterns in advancing age. The chapter discusses classic models of aging, and how these models provided the foundation for contemporary theories of aging and attention. Modern conceptualizations of aging and attention have expanded considerably beyond a processing speed account into models of distributed functional connectivity in the brain. The chapter also discusses recent interventional approaches designed to slow the course of cognitive aging through various “neuroenhancement” techniques.

Daniel Tranel ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my advisor, Shaun Vecera, for providing a supportive, productive environment. Shaun provided the support I needed to push forward and the guidance I needed to know where to push. These five years have been a great ride and they would not have been the same without such a supportive mentor. I would like to thank the lab: did all of you help improve the work presented here, but you also helped shape my thinking about cognitive psychology. I would like to thank Becky Huber for her tireless dedication to this department. Finally, I would like to thank my family, especially my parents who have continually supported me throughout my entire education: a gift that I value above all others. Lastly, I would like to thank my fiancé, Amy, for hearing out my endless complaints and providing the critical input needed to see this work through. iii ABSTRACT Complex behaviors require selectively attending to task-relevant items, and ignoring conspicuous, irrelevant items. For example, driving requires selectively attending to other cars on the road while ignoring flashing billboards. Dominant models of attentional control posit that we avoid distraction by biasing attention towards task-relevant items, and our ability to avoid distraction depends on the strength and specificity of this bias. I find that a strong, specific bias towards task-relevant items is insufficient for preventing distraction. Instead, preventing distraction also requires past experience ignoring distractors. I also find that long-term memory systems, rather than visual short-term memory or priming memory systems, maintain this experience. Based upon these findings, I propose that effective attentional control not only demands a strong, specific bias towards task-relevant items, but also requires that observers learn to ignore conspicuous, irrelevant items. iv PUBLIC ABSTRACT When driving, maintaining attention on task-relevant items, such as other cars on the road, is critical for avoiding dangerous events. Attention researchers posit that maintaining attention on task-relevant items depends solely on our ability to discriminate between relevant and irrelevant items. For instance, when we can easily discriminate between relevant items, such as cars, and irrelevant items, such as billboards, we selectively attend the relevant items. When we cannot discriminate between relevant and irrelevant items, we attend to both the relevant and irrelevant items. Here, I test whether target discriminability is sufficient for preventing distraction of if we also must learn to ignore conspicuous items. I find …

Visual attention is deployed through visual scenes to find behaviorally relevant targets. This attentional deployment-or attentional control-can be based on either stimulus factors, such as the salience of an object or region, or goal relevance, such as the match between an object and the target being searched for. Decades of research have measured attentional control by examining attentional interruption by a completely irrelevant distracting object, which may or may not capture attention. Based on the results of attentional capture tasks, the literature has distilled two alternative views of attentional control and capture: one focused on stimulus-driven factors and the other based on goal-driven factors. In the current paper, we propose an alternative in which stimulus-driven control and goal-driven control are not mutually exclusive but instead related through task dynamics, specifically experience. Attentional control is initially stimulus-driven. However, as participants gain experience with all aspects of a task, attentional control rapidly becomes increasingly goal-driven. We present four experiments that examine this experience-dependent attentional tuning. We show that to resist capture and be highly selective based on target properties, attention must be configured to aspects of a task through experience.

Recent neuroimaging studies suggest that early sensory areas such as area V1 are recruited to actively maintain a selected feature of the item held in visual short-term memory (VSTM). These findings raise the possibility that visual attention operates in similar manners across perceptual and memory representations to a certain extent, despite memory-level and perception-level selections are functionally dissociable. If VSTM operates by retaining "reasonable copies" of scenes constructed during sensory processing (Serences et al., 2009, p. 207, the sensory recruitment hypothesis), then it is possible that selective attention can be guided by both exogenous (peripheral) and endogenous (central) cues during VSTM maintenance. Yet, the results from the previous studies that examined this issue are inconsistent. In the present study, we investigated whether attention can be directed to a specific item's location represented in VSTM with the exogenous cue in a well-controlled setting. The results from the four experiments suggest that, as observed with the endogenous cue, the exogenous cue can efficiently guide selective attention during VSTM maintenance. The finding is not only consistent with the sensory recruitment hypothesis but also validates the legitimacy of the exogenous cue use in past and future studies.

Visual attention is deployed through visual scenes to find behaviorally relevant targets. This attentional deployment—or attentional control—can be based on either stimulus factors, such as the salience of an object or region, or goal relevance, such as the match between an object and the target being searched for. Decades of research have measured attentional control by examining attentional interruption by a completely irrelevant distracting object, which may or may not capture attention. Based on the results of attentional capture tasks, the literature has distilled two alternative views of attentional control and capture: one focused on stimulus-driven factors and the other based on goal-driven factors. In the current paper, we propose an alternative in which stimulus-driven control and goal-driven control are not mutually exclusive but instead related through task dynamics, specifically experience. Attentional control is initially stimulus-driven. However, as participants gain experience with all aspects of a task, attentional control rapidly becomes increasingly goal-driven. We present four experiments that examine this experience-dependent attentional tuning. We show that to resist capture and be highly selective based on target properties, attention must be configured to aspects of a task through experience.

Recent work on statistical learning has demonstrated that environmental regularities can influence aspects of perception, such as familiarity judgments. Here, we ask if statistical co-occurrences accumulated from visual statistical learning could form objects that serve as the units of attention (i.e., object-based attention). Experiment 1 demonstrated that, after observers first viewed pairs of shapes that co-occurred in particular spatial relationships, they were able to recognize the co-occurring pairs, and were faster to discriminate two targets when they appeared within a learned pair ("object") than when the targets appeared between learned pairs, demonstrating an equivalent of an object-based attention effect. Experiment 2 replicated the results of Experiment 1 using a different set of shape pairs, and revealed a negative association between the attention effect and familiarity judgments of the co-occurred pairs. Experiment 3 reports three control experiments that validated the task procedure and ruled out alternative accounts.

Because items near our hands are often more important than items far from our hands, the brain processes visual items near our hands differently than items far from our hands. Multiple experiments have attributed this processing difference to spatial attention, but the exact mechanism behind how spatial attention near our hands changes is still under investigation. The current experiments sought to differentiate between two of the proposed mechanisms: a prioritization of the space near the hands and a prolonged disengagement of spatial attention near the hands. To differentiate between these two accounts, we used the additional singleton paradigm in which observers searched for a shape singleton among homogenously shaped distractors. On half the trials, one of the distractors was a different color. Both the prioritization and disengagement accounts predict differently colored distractors near the hands will slow target responses more than differently colored distractors far from the hands, but the prioritization account also predicts faster responses to targets near the hands than far from the hands. The disengagement account does not make this prediction, because attention does not need to be disengaged when the target appears near the hand. We found support for the disengagement account: Salient distractors near the hands slowed responses more than those far from the hands, yet observers did not respond faster to targets near the hands.

Observers are faster to respond to targets near the hands than far (Reed et al., 2006), which demonstrates preferential processing of items near observers’ hands, but it is unclear if this preferential processing can override stimulus-driven attentional capture. To investigate if capture is influenced by hand position, observers completed the additional singleton paradigm (Theeuwes, 1992) with either their left or right hand near the screen. In the additional singleton paradigm, observers search for a shape singleton among homogenous distractors. Critically, on half the trials one of the distractors is a different color making it an additional singleton. Although this item is irrelevant to the task, observers are slower to respond to the target when the additional singleton is present. In the current experiments, if the attentional effects of hand position influence capture, then hand position might prevent or reduce capture when a salient stimulus appears far from the hand. Conversely, if stimulus-driven capture is impenetrable to body-based influences, , then capture would occur irrespective of the proximity of a salient stimulus to the hand. Our results confirm the former hypothesis, demonstrating that color singletons near the hand slowed response times to the target, t(15) = 2.4, p <. 05, whereas color singletons far from the hand did not, t(15) = 1.2, p > .24. These results suggest that the magnitude of stimulus-driven capture is affected by hand position. Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2013

Irrelevant salient distractors often capture attention, but given a sufficiently specific search template, these salient items no longer capture attention. In the present experiments, we investigated whether specific target templates are sufficient to resist capture, or whether experience with the salient distractors is also necessary. To test this hypothesis, observers completed four blocks of trials, each with a different-colored irrelevant singleton present on half of the trials. Color singletons captured attention early within a block, but after sufficient experience with the irrelevant singletons, those singletons no longer captured attention in the second halves of the blocks. This result suggests that to resist capture, a specific target template must be accompanied by experience-dependent attentional tuning to distractor properties.

Attention can select items based on location or features. Belopolsky and colleagues posited the attentional window hypothesis, which theorized that spatial and featural selection interact such that featural selection occurs within a "window" of spatial selection. Kerzel and colleagues recently found that the attentional window can take complex shapes, but cannot configure around non-contiguous locations. The current experiments investigated whether perceptual grouping cues, which produce perceptual objects or surfaces, enable the attentional window to configure around non-contiguous locations. Using the additional singleton paradigm, we reasoned that observers (1) would be slowed by a colour singleton distractor that appears within the observers' attentional window and (2) would be unaffected by distractors that do not appear within the attentional window. In separate blocks of trials, a target appeared upon one of two objects. Observers were cued to the relevant surface, and we asked if responses were affected by distractors on the cued task-relevant surface, and on the uncued irrelevant surface. Colour singleton distractors slowed responses when they appeared on the cued surface, even when those locations were non-contiguous locations. Distractors on the irrelevant surface did not affect responses. The results support a highly adaptable attentional window that is configurable to the surfaces and boundaries established by intermediate-level vision.

Background: Echocardiographic (ECHO)‐guided pacemaker optimization (PMO) in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) nonresponders acutely improves left ventricular (LV) function. However, the chronic results of LV pacing in this group are less understood. Methods: We retrospectively studied 28 CRT nonresponders optimized based on ECHO to LV pacing and compared them to 28 age‐ and gender‐matched patients optimized to biventricular (BiV) pacing. ECHOs with tissue Doppler imaging assessed LV hemodynamics before, immediately after, and 29 ± 16 months after PMO. Also, 56 age‐ and gender‐matched CRT responders were included for comparison of clinical outcomes. Results: PMO resulted in acute improvements in longitudinal LV systolic function and several measures of dyssynchrony, with greater improvements in the LV paced group. Chronic improvements in ejection fraction (EF) (3.2 ± 7.7%), and left ventricle end‐systolic volume (LVESV) (−11 ± 36 mL) and one dyssynchrony measure were seen in the combined group. Chronically, both LV and BiV paced patients improved some measures of systolic function and dyssynchrony although response varied between the groups. Survival at 3.5 years was similar (P = 0.973) between the PMO (58%) and nonoptimized groups (58%) but survival free of cardiovascular hospitalization was significantly (P = 0.037) better in the nonoptimized group. Conclusions : CRT nonresponders undergoing PMO to either LV or BiV pacing have acute improvements in longitudinal systolic function and some measures of dyssynchrony. Some benefits are sustained chronically, with improvements in EF, LVESV, and dyssynchrony. A strategy of ECHO‐guided PMO results in survival for CRT nonresponders similar to that of CRT patients not referred for PMO. (PACE 2012; 35:685–694))

Past studies have found specialized bimodal neurons, which integrate visual and tactile information in the space near the hand (Graziano & Goss, 1993). More recently, researchers demonstrated that these bimodal neurons influence early perceptual processes (Cosman & Vecera, 2010) and attentional prioritization of space (Reed et al., 2006). However, neither of these two studies examined how bimodal neurons interact with the saliency of the stimuli in the display. To answer this question, we investigated salience-based attentional capture by an irrelevant color singleton (Theeuwes, 1992). Participants searched for a shape singleton with an irrelevant color singleton present on half the trials. In addition, participants held their left hand near the display on half the trials and they held their right hand near the display on the other half. Our results confirmed past findings by showing, in distracter absent trials, faster reaction times when the target was near the hand than when the target was far from the hand. In addition, we found distracters near the hand captured attention significantly more than distracters far from the hand. Importantly, hand position affected capture by a color singleton more than hand position facilitated attention to the target shape singleton. Also, when a distracter was present in the display, response times to a target near the hand were no different from response times to a target far from the hand. Our results suggest that the attentional effects of hand position interact with the saliency of the items in the display.

Comprehensive pacemaker optimization (PMO) acutely improves systolic and diastolic function, and LV synchrony in patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), but chronic benefits of PMO have not been described. Further, there is no consensus if various types of PMO yield different results.

BACKGROUND:Several clinical trials have confirmed that cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves outcomes in well defined patient populations. It is uncertain, however, whether outcomes are similar in real-world clinical settings. This study compared outcomes after CRT with defibrillator (CRT-D) in a large real-world private-practice cardiology setting with those in the COMPANION multicenter trial.METHODS AND RESULTS:A total of 429 consecutive patients who received CRT-D for standard indications (group 1) were retrospectively compared with the 595 patients (group 3) in the COMPANION CRT-D cohort regarding survival and survival free of cardiovascular (CV) hospitalization. A subgroup of the group 1 patients who met the COMPANION entrance criteria (group 2) was also compared with the COMPANION cohort (group 3) both with and without propensity-matching statistical analysis. Survival and survival free of CV hospitalization was better in group 1 than in group 3. Survival in group 2 with and without propensity matching was similar to group 3. However, survival free of CV hospitalization was better in the real-world patients (group 2) even after adjustment for differences in baseline characteristics.CONCLUSIONS:Survival and CV hospitalization outcomes in a real-world clinical setting are as good as, or better than, those demonstrated in the COMPANION research trial.

Tabled 1Group 1Group 2Group 3Number5932141212Age (yrs)777567Male sex (%)716767Ischemic etiology (%)606255NYHA class III (%)888387BP (mm Hg)118/69117/68111/68QRS (ms)156151160EF272521LVEDD (cm)6.16.26.8LVESD (cm)5.25.4 Open table in a new tab Assessment of clinical status showed 27.8% of the patients markedly improved, 36.8% mildly improved, 21.1% unchanged and 4.4% worsened. EF increased by 6.2% + /- 10.4. LVEDD decreased by 4mm +/- 8 and LVESD decreased by 5mm +/- 9. Kaplan Meier curves of survival demonstrated annual mortality in Groups 1-3 respectively of 4.8%, 6.0% and 12%. Annual mortality for the US population, mean age 77, is 3.7%. Annual mortality or CV hospitalization was 10.2%, 11.6%, 30% in the 3 groups respectively. Conclusions: CRT outcomes in a large clinical practice are as good or better than those reported in the COMPANION multicenter trial. These data suggest that the benefits observed in clinical trials can be observed in "real world" patients. Assessment of clinical status showed 27.8% of the patients markedly improved, 36.8% mildly improved, 21.1% unchanged and 4.4% worsened. EF increased by 6.2% + /- 10.4. LVEDD decreased by 4mm +/- 8 and LVESD decreased by 5mm +/- 9. Kaplan Meier curves of survival demonstrated annual mortality in Groups 1-3 respectively of 4.8%, 6.0% and 12%. Annual mortality for the US population, mean age 77, is 3.7%. Annual mortality or CV hospitalization was 10.2%, 11.6%, 30% in the 3 groups respectively. Conclusions: CRT outcomes in a large clinical practice are as good or better than those reported in the COMPANION multicenter trial. These data suggest that the benefits observed in clinical trials can be observed in "real world" patients.