The causal role of the left parietal lobe in facilitation and inhibition of return

Martín-Arévalo, Elisa; Lupiáñez, Juan; Narganes-Pineda, Cristina; Marino, Giuliana; Colás, Itsaso; Chica, Ana B.

doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2019.04.025

Cited by 8 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 73 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Described as slow and underactive, CDS has been shown to be associated with poor performance in attention tasks, particularly in early selective attention, sustained attention and attention shifting ( 1 , 32 ). Studies have reported that CDS adolescents exhibit reduced response in the left superior parietal lobe ( 46 ), a region related to the orienting network ( 47 ). The diminished activity in the superior parietal lobe may explain the observed orienting and disengaging effects in the previous study ( 17 ) and our current findings.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unified and distinct cognitive control deficits in adolescents with cognitive disengagement syndrome and learning burnout

Weng,

Wu,

Wei

et al. 2024

Front. Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionCognitive disengagement syndrome (CDS) is a psychological disorder characterized by daydreaming, mental fogginess, and slow thinking, while learning burnout (LB) is characterized by a passive and inattentive attitude toward learning. These two disorders are closely related but can be challenging to differentiate from one another. The present study aimed to identify shared and distinct cognitive control deficits between CDS and LB.MethodsWe recruited 136 adolescents (aged 14 to 17 years) from an initial screening of CDS and LB (N = 476) and divided them into four groups: CDS, LB, CDS + LB, and typically developing control. After a second screening, 129 adolescents completed two tasks to assess their attentional networks and cognitive control capacity (CCC).ResultsAdolescents with high CDS symptoms (both CDS group and CDS+LB group) exhibited impaired disengaging effect of attention and lower CCC, indicating deficits in orienting attention and the upper limit of information processing for cognitive control specifically. Furthermore, support vector machine modeling identified CCC as the most significant parameter differentiating the CDS and LB groups.DiscussionOur findings suggest that while adolescents with high CDS and high LB symptoms have similar outward manifestations in the adolescent’s school life, deficits in attention and cognitive control, particularly in the CCC, may distinguish between the two groups.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unified and distinct cognitive control deficits in adolescents with cognitive disengagement syndrome and learning burnout

Weng,

Wu,

Wei

et al. 2024

Front. Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Exogenous attention is usually guided by emergent stimuli in the peripheral space. When the time interval between the cue and the target is approximately 200-300 ms, participants respond more slowly to the attended target, which is called inhibition of return (IOR) [5], this phenomenon has been observed in detection [6,7] and discrimination tasks [8,9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Relationship between Rhythmic Temporal Attention and Endogenous and Exogenous Spatial Attention

Li,

Lyu

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The adapted Posner spatial cue-target paradigm was used to explore the relationship between exogenous temporal attention caused by rhythm and endogenous and exogenous spatial attention. The study was divided into two experiments. In Experiment 1, 33 participants used arrow cues to orient endogenous spatial attention and rhythm to orient exogenous temporal attention. In Experiment 2, with 29 participants, exogenous spatial attention was directed by highlighting the cue box. Exogenous temporal attention was directed by rhythm. Experiment 1 indicated that RTs were faster for attended targets than the unattended. The main effect of temporal attention was significant, with RTs being faster for synchrony and late compared to early. RTs were faster for late compared to synchrony. The main effect of stimulus repetition was significant, with faster RTs for targets when the rhythmic cue consisted of ﬁve compared to four. The interaction between spatial attention and temporal attention was not significant. Experiment 2 demonstrated that exogenous spatial attention only exhibited IOR under early four stimulus repetitions. The main effect of temporal attention was significant, with RTs being faster for synchrony and late compared to early. The main effect of stimulus repetition was significant, with faster RTs for targets when the rhythmic cue consisted of ﬁve compared to four. The interaction between spatial attention and temporal attention was significant. The results indicated that rhythmic temporal attention supported foreperiod eﬀects. Exogenous temporal attention and endogenous spatial attention independently affect behavior, while exogenous temporal attention and exogenous spatial attention mutually influenced behavior.

show abstract

“…Specifically, when the cue and the target appear successively in the same spatial location, the visual system has a strong tendency to integrate the two stimuli. However, since the task requires participants to react to the target rather than the cue, processing resources will be consumed to distinguish between the cue and the target when presented in the same location, resulting in costs (Martín-Arévalo et al, 2013, 2019). Thus, the more similar the cue and the target are, the larger the detection cost (Hu et al, 2011; Lupiáñez et al, 2013).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Detection cost: A nonnegligible factor contributing to inhibition of return in the discrimination task under the cue–target paradigm

Zhang

Wang

2023

Perception

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The three-factor model argues that the spatial orienting benefit triggered by the cue, the spatial selection benefit of cue–target matching, and the detection cost of distinguishing the cue from the target contribute to the measured inhibition of return (IOR) effect. According to the three-factor model, the spatial selection benefit dominates the occurrence of the IOR effect in the discrimination task, while the detection cost is negligible. The present study verified the three-factor model in the discrimination task under the cue–target paradigm by manipulating the spatial location and nonspatial feature consistency of the cue and the target as well as the promotion or hindrance of attentional disengagement from the cued location with a central reorienting cue. The results indicated that the three factors of the three-factor model contributed to the measured IOR effect in the discrimination task. Interestingly, the IOR effect was stable when the cue and target were perfectly repeated and attention was maintained at the cued location, implying that detection cost was not a negligible factor. The current study supported the contribution of all three factors in the three-factor model to the measured IOR effect; however, we argue that the role of detection cost in the discrimination task under different paradigms should be further refined.

show abstract

The causal role of the left parietal lobe in facilitation and inhibition of return

Cited by 8 publications

References 73 publications

Unified and distinct cognitive control deficits in adolescents with cognitive disengagement syndrome and learning burnout

Unified and distinct cognitive control deficits in adolescents with cognitive disengagement syndrome and learning burnout

The Relationship between Rhythmic Temporal Attention and Endogenous and Exogenous Spatial Attention

Detection cost: A nonnegligible factor contributing to inhibition of return in the discrimination task under the cue–target paradigm

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About