Neural activity associated with attention orienting triggered by gaze cues: A study of lateralized ERPs

Abstract

This study investigated the electrophysiological (event-related potential, ERP) and behavioral (reaction time, RT) correlates of gaze-cued shifts of visuospatial attention. Participants viewed centrally presented faces with neutral expressions in which eyes looked straight ahead and then shifted to the left or right. Upon movement of the eyes, the facial expression either stayed the same (neutral) or changed to a fearful or happy expression. Participants' task was to identify a probe letter (T or L), which appeared in either the same or the opposite location to the direction of the eye gaze. There was behavioral evidence of a gaze congruency effect, as RTs were faster when the eyes looked toward rather than away from the location of the target. The ERP data indicated the presence of a significant gaze-congruent anterior directing attention negativity (ADAN) at anterior locations (300-500 ms after the onset of the gaze cue). ERP data did not show evidence of initial orienting of attention triggered by gaze cues in the early directing attention negativity (EDAN) at posterior locations (200-300 ms post-cue onset). The gaze cueing effects in the RT and ERP data were not significantly influenced by the emotional expression of the faces. The presence of the ADAN may reflect neural mechanisms that underlie the holding of attention on gazed-at locations.

Fearful, surprised, happy, and angry facial expressions modulate gaze-oriented attention: Behavioral and ERP evidence

“…A GOE increase with fearful compared to neutral and/or happy faces has been reported and interpreted as reflecting the evolutionary advantage to orient rapidly in the direction of a potential threat (Bayless, Glover, Taylor, & Itier, 2011;Fox, Mathews, Calder, & Yiend, 2007;Graham, Friesen, Fichtenholtz, & LaBar, 2010;Mathews, Fox, Yiend, & Calder, 2003;Pecchinenda, Pes, Ferlazzo, & Zoccolotti, 2008;Putman, Hermans, & Van Honk, 2006;Tipples, 2006). However, some studies failed to report such a modulation (Fichtenholtz, Hopfinger, Graham, Detwiler, & LaBar, 2007;Galfano et al, 2011;Hietanen & Leppänen, 2003;Holmes, Mogg, Garcia, & Bradley, 2010). The lack of GOE modulation with fearful faces could be due to the use of short SOAs (e.g., Galfano et al, 2011 using 200 ms SOA), as Graham et al (2010) suggested that a minimum of 300 ms was needed for a full gaze and emotion integration.…”

“…Using schematic faces, one study found no evidence for EDAN or ADAN with gaze cues, although they were both present with arrow cues (Hietanen, Leppänen, Nummenmaa, & Astikainen, 2008). Using face photographs, another study reported evidence for an ADAN but not an EDAN component (Holmes et al, 2010). It thus remains unclear whether these components can be found reliably in gaze cuing studies.…”

“…Using face photographs, another study reported evidence for an ADAN but not an EDAN component (Holmes et al, 2010). It thus remains unclear whether these components can be found reliably in gaze cuing studies.So far, few ERP studies investigated the influence of emotion on spatial attention and all of them failed to show emotional modulations of the attention-related ERPs with gaze orienting (Fichtenholtz et al, 2007;Fichtenholtz, Hopfinger, Graham, Detwiler, & LaBar, 2009;Galfano et al, 2011;Holmes et al, 2010). However, no clear modulations of the GOE with emotions were reported at the behavioral level in these experiments.…”

“…Based on careful observation of the current data and previous reports (Hietanen et al, 2008;Holmes et al, 2010;Van Velzen & Eimer, 2003), EDAN component was measured at posterior electrodes (averaged across P7 and PO7 on the left hemisphere and across P8 and PO8 on the right hemisphere) between 200 and 300 ms, while ADAN component was measured at anterior electrode sites (averaged across F5, F7, FC5, and FT7 for the left hemisphere and F6, F8, FC6, and FT8 for the right hemisphere) between 300 and 500 ms.…”

“…The lack of GOE modulation with fearful faces could be due to the use of short SOAs (e.g., Galfano et al, 2011 using 200 ms SOA), as Graham et al (2010) suggested that a minimum of 300 ms was needed for a full gaze and emotion integration. It could also result from the use of a more difficult discrimination task rather than a localization task (e.g., Holmes et al, 2010). As the combination of gaze and emotion cues indicate where a danger might be in the environment, modulation of the GOE by fear might be seen more clearly with a localization task.…”