Increased Activity in Human Visual Cortex during Directed Attention in the Absence of Visual Stimulation

Kästner, Sabine; Pinsk, Mark A.; Weerd, Peter De; Desimone, Robert; Ungerleider, Leslie G.

doi:10.1016/s0896-6273(00)80734-5

Cited by 1,483 publications

(1,305 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

135

Mentioning

1,142

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We propose that, together with the SPL, it serves to maintain a spatiotemporal bias against to-be-ignored locations, in favor of to-be-searched locations. In all, the parietal activation is reminiscent of activation found in numerous neuroimaging studies as part of an emerging general top-down frontoparietal attention network [for reviews see Corbetta, 1998;Kanwisher and Wojciulik, 2000;Kastner et al, 1999]. It provides support for the idea that observers actively bias attention toward the new items in the preview task.…”

Section: Discussion Previewmentioning

confidence: 66%

“…In a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study on humans, Coull and Nobre [1998], using a combined spatial/temporal cueing task, found parts of the intraparietal sulcus (IPS) and superior parietal lobule (SPL) to be active during spatial orienting, temporal orienting, or the combination of spatiotemporal orienting. Other neuroimaging studies have found the SPL to respond mainly to the cue rather than to the target, suggesting that it is involved in setting up or maintaining an expectation, in anticipation of the target [Corbetta, 1998;Kastner et al, 1999;Shulman et al, 1999]. The same conclusion can be reached based on patient studies indicating that the posterior parietal lobe is crucial in setting up, maintaining, or disengaging spatial attention [Friedrich et al, 1998;Posner et al, 1984Posner et al, , 1987.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 64%

“…Interestingly, the time taken for search was reduced across these intervals so increased activation was linked to enhanced filtering of distractors and not to search difficulty. Whereas in the studies of Pollmann et al [2003] and , participants may have employed color differences to segment relevant from irrelevant stimuli [compare to Kastner et al, 1999], participants in the present study could only make use of the spatiotemporal differences. Taken together, the findings point toward an important role for the SPL in top-down spatiotemporal selection against old information in favor of new information.…”

Section: Posterior Parietal Functionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Prioritizing new over old: An fMRI study of the preview search task

Olivers

Smith

Matthews

et al. 2004

Human Brain Mapping

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In visual search, observers can successfully ignore temporally separated distractors that are presented as a preview before onset of the search display. Previous behavioral studies have demonstrated the involvement of top-down selection mechanisms in preview search, biasing attention against the old set in favor of the more relevant new set. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging, we replicate and extend findings showing the involvement of superior and inferior parietal areas in the preview task when compared to both a relatively easy single-set search task and a more effortful full-set search task. In contrast, the effortful full-set search showed activation in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex when compared to the single-set search, suggesting that this area is involved in rejecting additional distractors that could not be separated in time. Hum Brain Mapp 24:69 -78, 2005.

show abstract

Section: Discussion Previewmentioning

confidence: 66%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 64%

Section: Posterior Parietal Functionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Prioritizing new over old: An fMRI study of the preview search task

Olivers

Smith

Matthews

et al. 2004

Human Brain Mapping

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Extensive activations also involved the medial occipital lobes (cuneus and lingual gyrus) bilaterally, extending anteriorly into the precuneus and posterior parahippocampal gyrus. These medial occipital activations, which likely reflect shifts of attention from foveal to peripheral visual locations (Brefczynski & DeYoe, 1999;Kastner et al, 1999;Tootell et al, 1998), are not relevant to the aims of this study and will not be discussed further. Additional activations involved the left frontoparietal operculum and supramarginal gyrus, right dorsal prefrontal cortex (MFG and superior frontal sulcus), bilateral suborbital sulcus and gyrus rectus, left orbitofrontal cortex (OFC), left mid-cingulate gyrus, and right angular gyrus.…”

Section: Fmrimentioning

confidence: 99%

Attentional and linguistic interactions in speech perception

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The role of attention in speech comprehension is not well understood. We used fMRI to study the neural correlates of auditory word, pseudoword, and nonspeech (spectrally-rotated speech) perception during a bimodal (auditory, visual) selective attention task. In three conditions, Attend Auditory (ignore visual), Ignore Auditory (attend visual), and Visual (no auditory stimulation), 28 subjects performed a one-back matching task in the assigned attended modality. The visual task, attending to rapidly presented Japanese characters, was designed to be highly demanding in order to prevent attention to the simultaneously presented auditory stimuli. Regardless of stimulus type, attention to the auditory channel enhanced activation by the auditory stimuli (Attend Auditory > Ignore Auditory) in bilateral posterior superior temporal regions and left inferior frontal cortex. Across attentional conditions, there were main effects of speech processing (word + pseudoword > rotated speech) in left orbitofrontal cortex and several posterior right hemisphere regions, though these areas also showed strong interactions with attention (larger speech effects in the Attend Auditory than in the Ignore Auditory condition) and no significant speech effects in the Ignore Auditory condition. Several other regions, including the postcentral gyri, left supramarginal gyrus, and temporal lobes bilaterally, showed similar interactions due to the presence of speech effects only in the Attend Auditory condition. Main effects of lexicality (word > pseudoword) were isolated to a small region of the left lateral prefrontal cortex. Examination of this region showed significant word > pseudoword activation only in the Attend Auditory condition. Several other brain regions, including left ventromedial frontal lobe, left dorsal prefrontal cortex, and left middle temporal gyrus, showed attention × lexicality interactions due to the presence of lexical activation only in the Attend Auditory condition. These results support a model in which neutral speech presented in an unattended sensory channel undergoes relatively little processing beyond the early perceptual level. Specifically, processing of phonetic and lexical-semantic information appears to be very limited in such circumstances, consistent with prior behavioral studies.

show abstract

“…Under conditions of low stimulus visibility, for example, human subjects generate preparatory signals in visual cortex, and variability in these preparatory signals at the time of target presentation predicts accuracy of stimulus detection (Ress, Backus, & Heeger, 2000) 1 . Preparatory signals also seem to be modulated by spatial attention (Corbetta, Kincade, & Shulman, 2002;Jack, Shulman, Snyder, McAvoy, & Corbetta, 2006;Kastner, Pinsk, De Weerd, Desimone, & Ungerleider, 1999;Serences, Yantis, Culberson, & Awh, 2004). Preliminary evidence suggests that one function of preparatory signals may be to reduce external noise (Serences et al, 2004).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%