Cueing distractors is effective when the incentive to suppress is high

Heuer, Anna; Schubö, Anna · 2025 · Crossref

DOI: 10.3758/s13414-025-03075-w

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This study investigates whether salient visual distractors can be voluntarily suppressed through top-down mechanisms when advance information is provided, and whether this suppression is contingent on motivational incentives. While implicit, experience-dependent suppression of distractors is well-established, the efficacy of explicit, trial-to-trial cueing remains debated, particularly for highly salient stimuli like color singletons. The authors hypothesized that anticipatory top-down suppression is an effortful process that requires sufficient motivation to be effective. To test this, they designed an experiment maximizing the incentive to suppress by using highly specific predictive cues and linking performance to monetary rewards. The researchers employed a cued additional singleton search task with 50 participants. On each trial, a central cue indicated either the specific location and color of an upcoming distractor (predictive cue, 100% validity) or provided no information (nonpredictive cue). Participants searched for a diamond-shaped target among circle-shaped distractors, one of which was a salient color singleton (red or green). Crucially, reward magnitude was coupled to the distractor’s color: one color was associated with a high monetary reward (+9 points) and the other with a low reward (+1 point) for correct responses. This design allowed the researchers to assess whether higher stakes increased the efficacy of distractor suppression. Electroencephalography (EEG) was recorded to measure the distractor positivity (PD), a lateralized event-related potential component reflecting active suppression, and the N2pc, reflecting target selection. Behavioral results demonstrated that predictive cues significantly reduced reaction times compared to nonpredictive cues, indicating successful anticipatory suppression. These cueing benefits increased over the course of the experiment, suggesting participants learned to utilize the cues effectively. High-reward distractors slowed responses more than low-reward ones, confirming that reward-associated distractors were more distracting. However, the reward magnitude did not interact with the cueing condition; the benefit of predictive cues was present regardless of reward level. Electrophysiologically, the PD amplitude was smaller for predictive cues than for nonpredictive cues, indicating that less active suppression was required when distractors were anticipated. Additionally, the PD was smaller for low-reward distractors compared to high-reward ones, reflecting the greater attentional capture of high-value stimuli. The target-related N2pc was unaffected by cue or reward conditions, confirming that the effects were specific to distractor processing. The findings provide proof-of-principle that salient distractors can be anticipatorily suppressed via top-down control when participants are sufficiently motivated. The study highlights that while reward increases the distractibility of stimuli, it also provides the necessary incentive to engage voluntary suppression mechanisms. The lack of interaction between reward and cueing suggests that once the incentive to suppress is established, the efficacy of cueing is robust. This work clarifies boundary conditions for top-down suppression, demonstrating that it is not merely a passive byproduct of attention but an active, effortful process driven by motivation and advance information.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-25; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• attention selective divided