Dorsal and Ventral Attention Systems

Abstract

The idea of two separate attention networks in the human brain for the voluntary deployment of attention and the reorientation to unexpected events, respectively, has inspired an enormous amount of research over the past years. In this review, we will reconcile these theoretical ideas on the dorsal and ventral attentional system with recent empirical findings from human neuroimaging experiments and studies in stroke patients. We will highlight how novel methods—such as the analysis of effective connectivity or the combination of neurostimulation with functional magnetic resonance imaging—have contributed to our understanding of the functionality and interaction of the two systems. We conclude that neither of the two networks controls attentional processes in isolation and that the flexible interaction between both systems enables the dynamic control of attention in relation to top-down goals and bottom-up sensory stimulation. We discuss which brain regions potentially govern this interaction according to current task demands.

The list-composition effect in memory for emotional and neutral pictures: Differential contribution of ventral and dorsal attention networks to successful encoding

“…They suggested that such activations express reflexive attention to salient, incongruent or infrequent stimuli; in other words, stimuli that are relatively distinct, triggering memory-enhancing processes that have more impact on immediate memory. Because we used an immediate memory test here, we expected to confirm their hypothesis, and predicted that in mixed lists we would observe greater subsequent memory effects in regions belonging to the ventral attention network ( VAN) for emotional compared to neutral stimuli (Corbetta, Patel, & Shulman, 2008;Viviani, 2013;Vossel, Geng, & Fink, 2014).…”

“…the contrast [-1 1 1 -1. In the dorsal attention network (Corbetta et al, 2008;Fox, Corbetta, Snyder, Vincent, & Raichle, 2006;Uncapher & Wagner, 2009) (Corbetta et al, 2008), and sometimes considered a mediator between attentional networks (Vossel et al, 2014). In addition we identified significant activations in memory / visual areas in right lingual gyrus (peak xyz = 24, -68, -2; Z = 4.87; KE = 1710; peak p < .001) extending into fusiform gyrus (peak xyz = 24, -74, -8) and parahippocampal gyrus (peak xyz = 24, -50, -8).…”

Adaptive working memory training improved brain function in human immunodeficiency virus–seropositive patients

“…The greater decreased activation predominantly in the cortical regions in our HIV participants also indicate lesser requirement of the “top‐down” attention network 24. In contrast, SN controls showed improved “bottom‐up” networks after adaptive WMT, suggesting that the processing might have become more automated 45. However, the decreased brain activation after adaptive WMT in our participants contrasts with the increased striatal BOLD signals following adaptive WMT in healthy individuals46 and in children with ADHD 47.…”

Anxiety in old age and dementia - implications for clinical and research practice

“…The brain's functionally and structurally independent yet cooperative attention network [98], is a fundamental component of our ability to selectively direct the brain's limited processing resources to the information of most relevance within the environment, which in turn influences many other aspects and levels of processing including cognition and perception. Research evidence indicates that some aspects of attention-related function can be influenced and modulated by anxiety [12,47,[99][100][101].…”