Attention and Para‐Attentional Processing. Event‐Related Brain Potentials as Tests of a Model

Abstract

In 1972 when we began to analyze the vast amount of material from the laboratories of physiological psychologists, we had only a vague conceptualization of what a model of attention might look like. We began where everyone else had, with the view that everything had something to do with "arousal" but with Lacey's (1967) warning in mind that all of the dependent variables might not actually be measuring aspects of the same process. With this warning in mind, we were forced by the data to organize them into a three-systems mode. Since the first publication of this model in 1975, we have found increasing amounts of evidence to support and extend it. This evidence is briefly reviewed in the present paper in terms of the techniques employed in various types of investigation. Further, the current review of data has made it possible to specify the para-attentional substrate (the extrinsic lemniscal primary projection systems) upon which the three systems described in the earlier model operate. The earlier model was based on psychophysiological, neurobehavioral and neurochemical analyses while the current specification results from the results of recordings of event-related brain electrical responses. The conclusions derived from these results can be summarized as follows: First. It has become possible to distinguish controlled attention from the para-attentional pre- and post-attentive automatic processes upon which controls operate. Second. The pre- and post-attentive processes appear to be coordinate with activity in the extrinsic lemniscal primary sensory projection systems. Processing in these systems is reflected in the early components of event-related brain electrical potentials. These extrinsic systems are, however, not just throughputs for further processing. Rather, they are sensitive to the history of reinforcement which the subject has experienced. The concept of a limited channel capacity must, therefore, be modified to encompass this ability of organisms to improve, through practice, their competence to process a great deal of information in parallel. Competence, not capacity, limits central processing span. Third. A set of intrinsic extralemniscal processing systems has been identified to operate via a tecto-tegmental pathway to the reticular nucleus of the thalamus. The later components (N2P3, etc.) of event-related potentials have been shown to reflect processing in these systems and those that control them. Activity in these systems has been related to targeted conscious awareness.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Brain Dynamics and Hypnosis: Attentional and Disattentional Processes

“…Such CBF data, in conjunction with previously reviewed SEW (Crawford, Pribram, et al, 1992Pribram, et al, ,19931993a, 1993b) and habituation (Gruzelier & Brow, 1985) findings suggestive of enhanced frontal lobe inhibitory processing during hypnosis, fail to support Bowers see also, Miller & Bowers, 1986,1993 conclusion that "hypnotic analgesia does not seem to require executive initiative and/or the sustained effort of higher, conscious processes" (Bowers, 1990, p. 171) but rather unspecified "lower levels" (p. 171) of cognitive control. Rather, I would argue that "dissociated control" still requires higher order cognitive and attentional effort (even though experienced as effortless or out of awareness).…”

“…Human and animal studies of the localization of attention have led various neuropsychological researchers, including Posner (e.g., Posner et al, 1988) and Pribram (Pribram, 1991;Pribram & McGuinness, 1992), to propose at least two major attentional systems: (a) a posterior attention system that involves processing and encoding of incoming information, and is where selective attentional processes of engaging and disengaging occur; and (b) an anterior attention system that involves "attention for action" (Posner et al, 1988(Posner et al, , p. 1628 and effortful attention over time (Pribram, 1991;Pribram & McGuinness, 1992). These higher attentional control processes involve both the frontal lobes and the limbic system to which there are major connecting fibers.…”

Frontal EEG/ERP correlates of attentional processes, cortisol and motivational states in adolescents from lower and higher socioeconomic status

“…Thus, our results are not only reliable, but also novel, since to our knowledge this is the first study on event-related asymmetry focusing on SES influences in children. Given the link between attention deployment and subjective perception of mental effort (e.g., Pribram and McGuinness, 1977, 1991; Howells et al, 2010), the broader psychological/functional implication is that the frontal asymmetry differences observed in the theta band in lower SES children reflect level of perceived mental effort during the selective attention task.…”

Cortical involvement in visual scan in the monkey

“…Thus, eye movements do not become permanently stuck but range widely only to become repeatedly captured by one or another cue. Bias with regard to temporal lobe function depends not only on the feature properties of the stimulus: As was shown in behavioral experiments, on task parameters such as the successive versus the simultaneous presentation of cues (Pribram & Mishkin, 1955) and the competencies achieved in the situation through learning (Pribram & McGuinness, 1975, 1992. In short, fluidity in scan appears to reflect a more basic process such as comprehension, the competence to grasp (prehend) the demands of the situation.…”