Saccadic eye movements (SEMs) are the primary means of gating visual information in primates and strongly influence visual perception. The active exploration of the visual environment ("active vision") via SEMs produces suppression during saccades and enhancement afterward (i.e., during fixation) in occipital visual areas. In lateral temporal lobe visual areas, the influence, if any, of eye movements is less well understood, despite the necessity of these areas for forming coherent percepts of objects. The upper bank of the superior temporal sulcus (uSTS) is one such area whose sensitivity to SEMs is unknown. We therefore examined how saccades modulate local field potentials (LFPs) in the uSTS of macaque monkeys while they viewed face and nonface object stimuli. LFP phase concentration increased following fixation onset in the alpha (8 -14 Hz), beta (14 -30 Hz), and gamma (30 -60 Hz) bands and was distinct from the image-evoked response.
The prefrontal cortex (PFC) has been implicated in higher order cognitive control of behavior. Sometimes such control is executed through suppression of an unwanted response in order to avoid conflict. Conflict occurs when two simultaneously competing processes lead to different behavioral outcomes, as seen in tasks such as the anti-saccade, go/no-go, and the Stroop task. We set out to examine whether different types of stimuli in a modified emotional Stroop task would cause similar interference effects as the original Stroop-color/word, and whether the required suppression mechanism(s) would recruit similar regions of the medial PFC (mPFC). By using emotional words and emotional faces in this Stroop experiment, we examined the two well-learned automatic behaviors of word reading and recognition of face expressions. In our emotional Stroop paradigm, words were processed faster than face expressions with incongruent trials yielding longer reaction times and larger number of errors compared to the congruent trials. This novel Stroop effect activated the anterior and inferior regions of the mPFC, namely the anterior cingulate cortex, inferior frontal gyrus as well as the superior frontal gyrus. Our results suggest that prepotent behaviors such as reading and recognition of face expressions are stimulus-dependent and perhaps hierarchical, hence recruiting distinct regions of the mPFC. Moreover, the faster processing of word reading compared to reporting face expressions is indicative of the formation of stronger stimulus–response associations of an over-learned behavior compared to an instinctive one, which could alternatively be explained through the distinction between awareness and selective attention.
The aim of this methods paper is to describe how to implement a neuroimaging technique to examine complementary brain processes engaged by two similar tasks. Participants' behavior during task performance in an fMRI scanner can then be correlated to the brain activity using the blood-oxygen-level-dependent signal. We measure behavior to be able to sort correct trials, where the subject performed the task correctly and then be able to examine the brain signals related to correct performance. Conversely, if subjects do not perform the task correctly, and these trials are included in the same analysis with the correct trials we would introduce trials that were not only for correct performance. Thus, in many cases these errors can be used themselves to then correlate brain activity to them. We describe two complementary tasks that are used in our lab to examine the brain during suppression of an automatic responses: the stroop 1 and anti-saccade tasks. The emotional stroop paradigm instructs participants to either report the superimposed emotional 'word' across the affective faces or the facial 'expressions' of the face stimuli 1,2 . When the word and the facial expression refer to different emotions, a conflict between what must be said and what is automatically read occurs. The participant has to resolve the conflict between two simultaneously competing processes of word reading and facial expression. Our urge to read out a word leads to strong 'stimulus-response (SR)' associations; hence inhibiting these strong SR's is difficult and participants are prone to making errors. Overcoming this conflict and directing attention away from the face or the word requires the subject to inhibit bottom up processes which typically directs attention to the more salient stimulus. Similarly, in the anti-saccade task 3,4,5,6 , where an instruction cue is used to direct only attention to a peripheral stimulus location but then the eye movement is made to the mirror opposite position. Yet again we measure behavior by recording the eye movements of participants which allows for the sorting of the behavioral responses into correct and error trials 7 which then can be correlated to brain activity. Neuroimaging now allows researchers to measure different behaviors of correct and error trials that are indicative of different cognitive processes and pinpoint the different neural networks involved. Video LinkThe Participants with contraindications must be excluded.1. Provide training on task performance on anti-saccade. 1. Green fixation indicates a pro-saccade trial. Instruct participants to look to the target appearing in the periphery of the screen, at a visual angle of 8-10°. 2. Red fixation indicates an anti-saccade trial. Instruct participant to look to the mirror opposite of target appearing in the periphery of the screen, at a visual angle of 8-10°(e.g. for right target, look to the left).2. Provide training on task performance for the emotional Stroop outside the scanner. 1. Include 15 practice trials with different combi...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.