The ANTI-Vea-UGR Platform: A Free Online Resource to Measure Attentional Networks (Alertness, Orienting, and Executive Control) Functioning and Executive/Arousal Vigilance.

The Attentional Networks Test for Interactions and Vigilance-executive and arousal components (ANTI-Vea) is a computerized task of 32 min duration in the standard format. The task simultaneously assesses the main effects and interactions of the three attentional networks (i.e., phasic alertness, orienting, and executive control) and two dissociated components of vigilance with reasonable reliability (executive and arousal vigilance). We present this free and publicly accessible resource (ANTI-Vea-UGR; https://anti-vea.ugr.es/) developed to easily run, collect, and analyze data with the ANTI-Vea (or its subtasks measuring some attentional and/or vigilance components embedded in the ANTI-Vea). Available in six different languages, the platform allows for the adaptation of stimulus timing and procedure to facilitate data collection from different populations (e.g., clinical patients, children). Collected data can be freely downloaded and easily analyzed with the provided scripts and tools, including a Shiny app. We discuss previous evidence supporting that attention and vigilance components can be assessed in typical lab conditions as well as online and outside the laboratory. We hope this tutorial will help researchers interested in measuring attention and vigilance with a tool useful to collect data from large sample sizes and easy to use in applied contexts.

Attentional Capture From Inside vs. Outside the Attentional Focus.

In this study, we jointly reported in an empirical and a theoretical way, for the first time, two main theories: Lavie's perceptual load theory and Gaspelin et al.'s attentional dwelling hypothesis. These theories explain in different ways the modulation of the perceptual load/task difficulty over attentional capture by irrelevant distractors and lead to the observation of the opposite results with similar manipulations. We hypothesized that these opposite results may critically depend on the distractor type used by the two experimental procedures (i.e., distractors inside vs. outside the attentional focus, which could be, respectively, considered as potentially relevant vs. completely irrelevant to the main task). Across a series of experiments, we compared both theories within the same paradigm by manipulating both the perceptual load/task difficulty and the distractor type. The results were strongly consistent, suggesting that the influence of task demands on attentional capture varies as a function of the distractor type: while the interference from (relevant) distractors presented inside the attentional focus was consistently higher for high vs. low load conditions, there was no modulation by (irrelevant) distractors presented outside the attentional focus. Moreover, we critically analyzed the theoretical conceptualization of interference using both theories, disentangling important outcomes for the dwelling hypothesis. Our results provide specific insights into new aspects of attentional capture, which can critically redefine these two predominant theories.