Distinct neural mechanisms of distractor suppression in the frontal and parietal lobe

Suzuki, Mototaka; Gottlieb, Jacqueline

doi:10.1038/nn.3282

Cited by 248 publications

(284 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

221

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Most intriguingly, the source localization of dlPFC, in conjunction with the reduced N1 response during successful selfcontrol, matches recent work suggesting a special role for this region in attention suppression (Lennert and Martinez-Trujillo, 2011;Suzuki and Gottlieb, 2013). In this light, the reduced N1 response associated with self-control success, relative to failure, may reflect anticipatory suppression in the presence of potentially tempting foods.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

“…The hypothesis is based on previous studies, which have shown dynamic fluctuations in top-down attentional filtering by dlPFC during perceptual and working memory tasks (Zanto and Gazzaley, 2009;Lennert and Martinez-Trujillo, 2011;Suzuki and Gottlieb, 2013). We tested this hypothesis in two steps.…”

Section: Erp and Early Attentional Filtering: Stronger Dlpfc Activitymentioning

confidence: 93%

“…This pattern may reflect dynamic fluctuations in top-down attentional filtering by dlPFC, in keeping with its role in ignoring irrelevant stimuli during perceptual and working memory tasks (Zanto and Gazzaley, 2009;Lennert and MartinezTrujillo, 2011;Suzuki and Gottlieb, 2013). Consistent with this idea, a post hoc analysis showed that reaction times were significantly slower for failed than for successful self-control trials (t (27) ϭ Ϫ3.6, p ϭ 0.002), perhaps reflecting increased influence of distracting information on decision-making in these trials.…”

Section: Erp and Early Attentional Filtering: Plv Between Frontal Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Temporally Dissociable Mechanisms of Self-Control: Early Attentional Filtering Versus Late Value Modulation

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Optimal decision-making often requires exercising self-control. A growing fMRI literature has implicated the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) in successful self-control, but due to the limitations inherent in BOLD measures of brain activity, the neurocomputational role of this region has not been resolved. Here we exploit the high temporal resolution and whole-brain coverage of event-related potentials (ERPs) to test the hypothesis that dlPFC affects dietary self-control through two different mechanisms: attentional filtering and value modulation. Whereas attentional filtering of sensory input should occur early in the decision process, value modulation should occur later on, after the computation of stimulus values begins. Hungry human subjects were asked to make food choices while we measured neural activity using ERP in a natural condition, in which they responded freely and did not exhibit a tendency to regulate their diet, and in a self-control condition, in which they were given a financial incentive to lose weight. We then measured various neural markers associated with the attentional filtering and value modulation mechanisms across the decision period to test for changes in neural activity during the exercise of self-control. Consistent with the hypothesis, we found evidence for top-down attentional filtering early on in the decision period (150 -200 ms poststimulus onset) as well as evidence for value modulation later in the process (450 -650 ms poststimulus onset). We also found evidence that dlPFC plays a role in the deployment of both mechanisms.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Section: Erp and Early Attentional Filtering: Stronger Dlpfc Activitymentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Erp and Early Attentional Filtering: Plv Between Frontal Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Temporally Dissociable Mechanisms of Self-Control: Early Attentional Filtering Versus Late Value Modulation

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The deficits of the LLF group are consistent with impairment in selectively attending to the relevant, but nonsalient, shape dimension and ignoring salient distractors, resulting in the misattribution of rewards in this learning context. This view is consistent with this region's putative contribution to selective attention in other settings, like visual search (Buschman and Miller, 2007;Suzuki and Gottlieb, 2013;Tremblay et al, 2015), and the classic Stroop task (Perret, 1974;Gläscher et al, 2012;Tsuchida and Fellows, 2013).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 62%

Necessary Contributions of Human Frontal Lobe Subregions to Reward Learning in a Dynamic, Multidimensional Environment

Vaidya

Fellows

2016

J. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Real-world decisions are typically made between options that vary along multiple dimensions, requiring prioritization of the important dimensions to support optimal choice. Learning in this setting depends on attributing decision outcomes to the dimensions with predictive relevance rather than to dimensions that are irrelevant and nonpredictive. This attribution problem is computationally challenging, and likely requires an interplay between selective attention and reward learning. Both these processes have been separately linked to the prefrontal cortex, but little is known about how they combine to support learning the reward value of multidimensional stimuli. Here, we examined the necessary contributions of frontal lobe subregions in attributing feedback to relevant and irrelevant dimensions on a trial-by-trial basis in humans. Patients with focal frontal lobe damage completed a demanding reward learning task where options varied on three dimensions, only one of which predicted reward. Participants with left lateral frontal lobe damage attributed rewards to irrelevant dimensions, rather than the relevant dimension. Damage to the ventromedial frontal lobe also impaired learning about the relevant dimension, but did not increase reward attribution to irrelevant dimensions. The results argue for distinct roles for these two regions in learning the value of multidimensional decision options under dynamic conditions, with the lateral frontal lobe required for selecting the relevant dimension to associate with reward, and the ventromedial frontal lobe required to learn the reward association itself.

show abstract

“…The DLPFC, on the other hand, is thought to mediate high‐order cognitive control: self‐monitoring, planning, maintenance, and manipulation of information in working memory, suppression of irrelevant stimuli, and selection among competing responses [Frith, 2000; Petrides, 2005; Suzuki and Gottlieb, 2013]. The deactivation of the DLPFC observed here suggests that the generative phase may be associated with a suspension of those aspects of cognitive control—for example, consciously monitored step‐by‐step execution of behavior—that could impede the creative process.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brain activity and connectivity during poetry composition: Toward a multidimensional model of the creative process

Liu

Erkkinen

Healey

et al. 2015

Human Brain Mapping

147

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Creativity, a multifaceted construct, can be studied in various ways, for example, investigating phases of the creative process, quality of the creative product, or the impact of expertise. Previous neuroimaging studies have assessed these individually. Believing that each of these interacting features must be examined simultaneously to develop a comprehensive understanding of creative behavior, we examined poetry composition, assessing process, product, and expertise in a single experiment. Distinct activation patterns were associated with generation and revision, two major phases of the creative process. Medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC) was active during both phases, yet responses in dorsolateral prefrontal and parietal executive systems (DLPFC/IPS) were phase‐dependent, indicating that while motivation remains unchanged, cognitive control is attenuated during generation and re‐engaged during revision. Experts showed significantly stronger deactivation of DLPFC/IPS during generation, suggesting that they may more effectively suspend cognitive control. Importantly however, similar overall patterns were observed in both groups, indicating the same cognitive resources are available to experts and novices alike. Quality of poetry, assessed by an independent panel, was associated with divergent connectivity patterns in experts and novices, centered upon MPFC (for technical facility) and DLPFC/IPS (for innovation), suggesting a mechanism by which experts produce higher quality poetry. Crucially, each of these three key features can be understood in the context of a single neurocognitive model characterized by dynamic interactions between medial prefrontal areas regulating motivation, dorsolateral prefrontal, and parietal areas regulating cognitive control and the association of these regions with language, sensorimotor, limbic, and subcortical areas distributed throughout the brain. Hum Brain Mapp 36:3351–3372, 2015. © 2015 The Authors. Human Brain Mapping Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc..

show abstract

Distinct neural mechanisms of distractor suppression in the frontal and parietal lobe

Cited by 248 publications

References 52 publications

Temporally Dissociable Mechanisms of Self-Control: Early Attentional Filtering Versus Late Value Modulation

Temporally Dissociable Mechanisms of Self-Control: Early Attentional Filtering Versus Late Value Modulation

Necessary Contributions of Human Frontal Lobe Subregions to Reward Learning in a Dynamic, Multidimensional Environment

Brain activity and connectivity during poetry composition: Toward a multidimensional model of the creative process

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About