ERP correlates of anticipatory attention: spatial and non-spatial specificity and relation to subsequent selective attention

Dale, Corby L.; Simpson, Gregory V.; Foxe, John J.; Luks, Tracy; Worden, Michael S.

doi:10.1007/s00221-008-1338-4

Cited by 26 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 73 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We defined the time periods analogous to defining “components”, through an assessment of the range of post-cue latencies reported in the literature for the following four attention-related scalp components (Harter et al, 1989; Hopf & Mangun, 2000; Nobre et al, 2000a; van Velzen et al, 2002; Praamstra et al, 2005; Slagter et al, 2005; Simpson et al, 2006; Jongen et al, 2006; Green & McDonald, 2006, 2010; van der Lubbe et al, 2006; Grent-‘t-Jong & Woldorff, 2007; Dale et al, 2008). (1) An early, short duration process (Positivity contralateral early – Pce) occurring during 125–175 ms; (2) a subsequent component often referred to as the early directing attention negativity (EDAN) occurring between 250–350 ms; (3) a middle period associated with activity commonly called the anterior directing attention negativity (ADAN) occurring between 400–500 ms; (4) a late period toward the end of the cue delay up to the onset of the target, which would correspond to 800–1000 ms in this study, often called the late attention directing positivity (LDAP).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Functional MRI studies have shown that multiple frontal, parietal and visual sensory regions are active during anticipatory deployment of visual spatial attention (Kastner and Ungerlieder, 2000; Corbetta and Shulman 2002; Serences and Yantis, 2006). Scalp ERP studies indicate that multiple direction-specific attentional stages occur within fractions of a second following a cue to covertly deploy attention to a spatial location in anticipation of a stimulus, and they support the possibility of different configurations of active cortical regions in each deployment stage, although the brain regions involved in each ERP stage are not well established (Nobre et al, 2000a; Hopf and Mangun 2000; Praamstra et al, 2005; Slagter et al, 2005; van der Lubbe et al, 2006; Dale et al, 2008). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dynamic Activation of Frontal, Parietal, and Sensory Regions Underlying Anticipatory Visual Spatial Attention

Simpson

Weber²,

Dale³

et al. 2011

J. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although it is well established that multiple frontal, parietal and occipital regions in humans are involved in anticipatory deployment of visual spatial attention, less is known about the electrophysiological signals in each region across multiple sub-second periods of attentional deployment. We used MEG measures of cortical stimulus-locked, signal-averaged (ERF) activity during a task in which a symbolic cue directed covert attention to the relevant location on each trial. Direction-specific attention effects occurred in different cortical regions for each of multiple time periods during the delay between the cue and imperative stimulus. A sequence of activation from V1/V2 to extrastriate, parietal and frontal regions occurred within 110 ms post-cue, possibly related to extraction of cue meaning. Direction-specific activations ~300 ms post-cue in FEF, LIP and Cuneus support early covert targeting of the cued location. This was followed by co-activation of a frontal-parietal system (SFG, MFG, LIP, IPSa, LIP) that may coordinate the transition from targeting the cued location to sustained deployment of attention to both space and feature in the last period. The last periodinvolved direction-specific activity in parietal regions and both dorsal and ventral sensory regions (LIP, IPSa, IPSv, LO, Fusiform), which was accompanied by activation that was not direction-specific in right hemisphere frontal regions (FEF, SFG, MFG). Behavioral performance corresponded with the magnitude of attention-related activity in different brain regions at each time period during deployment. The results add to the emerging electrophysiological characterization of different cortical networks that operate during anticipatory deployment of visual spatial attention.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamic Activation of Frontal, Parietal, and Sensory Regions Underlying Anticipatory Visual Spatial Attention

Simpson

Weber²,

Dale³

et al. 2011

J. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Data from functional imaging (Coull and Nobre 1998;Gitelman et al 1999), electrophysiology (e.g. Foxe et al 1998Foxe et al , 2003Foxe et al , 2005aFoxe and Simpson 2005;Dale et al 2008) and of course, from hemi-spatial neglect patients (e.g. Heilman and van den Abell 1980;Perani 1986, 1987) have clearly implicated dorsal stream visual areas in the control of spatial attention mechanisms.…”

Section: Implications Of a Parvocellular Origin Of The ''C1'' For Attmentioning

confidence: 97%

Parvocellular and Magnocellular Contributions to the Initial Generators of the Visual Evoked Potential: High-Density Electrical Mapping of the “C1” Component

et al. 2008

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The C1 component of the VEP is considered to index initial afference of retinotopic regions of human visual cortex (V1 and V2). C1 onsets over central parieto-occipital scalp between 45 and 60 ms, peaks between 70 and 100 ms, and then resolves into the following P1 component. By exploiting isoluminant and low-contrast luminance stimuli, we assessed the relative contributions of the Magnocellular (M) and Parvocellular (P) pathways to generation of C1. C1 was maximal at 88 ms in a 100% luminance contrast condition (which stimulates both P and M pathways) and at 115 ms in an isoluminant chromatic condition (which isolates contributions of the P pathway). However, in a 4% luminance contrast condition (which isolates the M pathway), where the stimuli were still clearly perceived, C1 was completely absent. Absence of C1 in this low contrast condition is unlikely to be attributable to lack of stimulus energy since a robust P1-N1 complex was evoked. These data therefore imply that C1 may be primarily parvocellular in origin. The data do not, however, rule out some contribution from the M system at higher contrast levels. Nonetheless, that the amplitude of C1 to P-isolating isoluminant chromatic stimuli is equivalent to that evoked by 100% contrast stimuli suggests that even at high contrast levels, the P system is the largest contributor. These data are related to intracranial recordings in macaque monkeys that have also suggested that the initial current sink in layer IV may not propagate effectively to the scalp surface when M-biased stimuli are used. We also discuss how this finding has implications for a long tradition of attention research that has used C1 as a metric of initial V1 afference in humans. C1 has been repeatedly interrogated for potential selective attentional modulations, particularly in spatial attentional designs, under the premise that modulation of this component, or lack thereof, would be evidence for or against selection at the initial inputs to visual cortex. Given the findings here, we would urge that in interpreting C1 effects, a consideration of the dominant cellular contributions will be necessary. For example, it is plausible that spatial attention mechanisms could operate primarily through the M system and that as such C1 may not always represent an adequate dependent measure in such studies.

show abstract

“…Neuroimaging studies have also shown that posterior parietal regions are associated with the spatial mapping of auditory (Cohen, Russ, & Gifford, 2005;Weeks et al, 1999) and visual stimuli (Colby & Goldberg, 1999;Heinze et al, 1994). ERP studies of spatial attention reported evidence of bimodal spatio-temporal components during spatial attention tasks (Dale, Simpson, Foxe, Luks, & Worden, 2008;Green et al, 2005;Eimer, van Velzen, & Driver, 2002;Hopf & Mangun, 2000).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modality-dependent “What” and “Where” Preparatory Processes in Auditory and Visual Systems

Diaconescu

Alain

McIntosh

2011

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study examined the modality specificity and spatio-temporal dynamics of "what" and "where" preparatory processes in anticipation of auditory and visual targets using ERPs and a cue-target paradigm. Participants were presented with an auditory (Experiment 1) or a visual (Experiment 2) cue that signaled them to attend to the identity or location of an upcoming auditory or visual target. In both experiments, participants responded faster to the location compared to the identity conditions. Multivariate spatio-temporal partial least square (ST-PLS) analysis of the scalp-recorded data revealed supramodal "where" preparatory processes between 300-600 msec and 600-1200 msec at central and posterior parietal electrode sites in anticipation of both auditory and visual targets. Furthermore, preparation for pitch processing was captured at modality-specific temporal regions between 300 and 700 msec, and preparation for shape processing was detected at occipital electrode sites between 700 and 1150 msec. The spatio-temporal patterns noted above were replicated when a visual cue signaled the upcoming response (Experiment 2). Pitch or shape preparation exhibited modality-dependent spatio-temporal patterns, whereas preparation for target localization was associated with larger amplitude deflections at multimodal, centro-parietal sites preceding both auditory and visual targets. Using a novel paradigm, the study supports the notion of a division of labor in the auditory and visual pathways following both auditory and visual cues that signal identity or location response preparation to upcoming auditory or visual targets. Abstract ■ The present study examined the modality specificity and spatio-temporal dynamics of "what" and "where" preparatory processes in anticipation of auditory and visual targets using ERPs and a cue-target paradigm. Participants were presented with an auditory (Experiment 1) or a visual (Experiment 2) cue that signaled them to attend to the identity or location of an upcoming auditory or visual target. In both experiments, participants responded faster to the location compared to the identity conditions. Multivariate spatio-temporal partial least square (ST-

show abstract

ERP correlates of anticipatory attention: spatial and non-spatial specificity and relation to subsequent selective attention

Cited by 26 publications

References 73 publications

Dynamic Activation of Frontal, Parietal, and Sensory Regions Underlying Anticipatory Visual Spatial Attention

Dynamic Activation of Frontal, Parietal, and Sensory Regions Underlying Anticipatory Visual Spatial Attention

Parvocellular and Magnocellular Contributions to the Initial Generators of the Visual Evoked Potential: High-Density Electrical Mapping of the “C1” Component

Modality-dependent “What” and “Where” Preparatory Processes in Auditory and Visual Systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About