502, p = 0.138; all other Fs < 1). Analysis of peak amplitude garnered similar results (intertrial condition × electrode www.selleckchem.com/products/epacadostat-incb024360.html location: F(1,11) = 3.874, p = 0.071; electrode location: F(1,11) = 6.117, p = 0.031; all other Fs < 1). Our final prediction was that attention would be deployed to the distractor in swap trials, resulting in a distractor-elicited N2pc. With this in mind we examined the ERP created when the target was presented on the vertical meridian of the visual search array and the salient distractor was presented to a lateral

position. Under these circumstances the target is equally represented in both of the visual cortices and deployment of attention to its location does not create lateralized activity in visual cortex (Woodman and Luck, 2003, Hickey et al., 2006, Hickey et al., 2009 and Hickey et al., 2010a). This means that any lateralized activity identified in the ERP elicited by this stimulus configuration can be unambiguously associated to processing

of the distractor. In the no-swap condition there is little evidence of any difference between ipsilateral and contralateral waveforms (Fig. 4a), but in the swap ERP a distractor-elicited N2pc is evident (Fig. 4b). This pattern was statistically assessed in a 3-way RANOVA with factors for electrode location, target location, and intertrial condition based on mean amplitude from 265 Sorafenib solubility dmso to 290 ms. A significant interaction between electrode location and intertrial condition was revealed, reflecting a reliable increase of distractor-elicited N2pc amplitude in the swap condition (F(1,11) = 4.996, p = 0.047). No other effects were significant (electrode Oxymatrine location: F(1,11) = 1.227, p = 0.288; target location: F(1,11) = 1.786, p = 0.204; electrode location × target location: F(1,11) = 1.087, p = 0.316; all other Fs < 1). Analysis based on amplitude observed at the latency of the

N2pc peak in the swap condition garnered similar results (electrode location × intertrial condition: F(1,11) = 5.725, p = 0.036; electrode location: F(1,11) = 2.661, p = 0.131; all other Fs < 1). Consistent with the idea that attention was deployed to the distractor in swap trials, there is little evidence of a target-elicited N2pc in the ERP elicited when the colors swapped and the target and distractor were presented contralateral to one another (Fig. 4c). In contrast, a late distractor-elicited N2pc is apparent. Beginning at approximately 380 ms the waveform elicited contralateral to the distractor (and thus ipsilateral to the target) is more negative than the waveform elicited ipsilateral to the distractor (and thus contralateral to the target). To demonstrate that the target-elicited N2pc elicited in the no-swap condition ( Fig. 1b) was reliably different from the ERP elicited through the same time period in the swap condition ( Fig.