The eyes have it!: An fMRI investigation

Abstract

For the past several years it has been thought that cues, such as eye direction, can trigger reflexive shifts in attention because of their biological relevance and their specialized neural architecture. However, very recently, Ristic, Friesen, and Kingstone (2002) reported that other stimuli, such as arrows, trigger reflexive shifts in attention in a manner that is behaviourally identical to those triggered by eyes. Nevertheless these authors speculated that reflexive orienting to gaze direction may be subserved by a neural system-the superior temporal sulcus (STS)-that is specialized for processing eyes. The present study presents fMRI data that provide direct and compelling empirical support to this proposal. Subjects were presented with fixation stimuli that, based on instruction, could be perceived as eyes or as another type of directional cue. Both produced equivalent shifts in reflexive attention, replicating Ristic et al. However, the neural systems subserving the two forms of orienting were not equivalent-with the STS being engaged exceptionally when the fixation stimulus was perceived as eyes.

Spatial orienting of tactile attention induced by social cues

“…This is consistent with a proposed circuit in which first the cue would be decoded by a specialized mechanism and then the output of this processing would be relayed to a generic attention mechanism, which would reorient the focus of attention (see Corbetta & Shulman, 2002, for a recent review of the possible structural and functional components of attentional orienting). In line with this idea, extant neuroimaging data has revealed links between the superior temporal sulcus (putatively the eye-gaze interpreter) and the posterior parietal cortex, an area critical for orienting attention in space (George, Driver, & Dolan, 2001; also see Kingstone et al, 2004). Interestingly for the interpretation of our results, several neuropsychological (e.g., Làdavas & Farnè, 2004), human electrophysiological (e.g., Kingstone et al, 2004;McDonald, Teder-Sälejärvi, Di Russo, & Hillyard, 2003), and neuroimaging (e.g., Macaluso & Driver, 2004) studies show that the cited attention mechanisms in the parietal cortex are multimodal.…”

“…However, this lack of behavioral dissociation does not necessarily imply that eye gaze and other types of cues are processed alike (Kingstone et al, 2000;Kingstone et al, 2004) or even that they always have an equivalent behavioral effect. For instance, Friesen et al (2004) have found that it is harder to attend to the opposite direction of a gaze cue than to that of an arrow cue (also see Kingstone et al, 2000, andRicciardelli, Ro, &, for laterality-based dissociations).…”

“…For instance, Friesen et al (2004) have found that it is harder to attend to the opposite direction of a gaze cue than to that of an arrow cue (also see Kingstone et al, 2000, andRicciardelli, Ro, &, for laterality-based dissociations). Moreover, evidence from neuroimaging studies points to certain brain areas (i.e., the superior temporal sulcus) as being specialized in de- coding dynamic aspects of faces, such as eye-gaze direction (Hoffman & Haxby, 2000;Kingstone et al, 2004;see Perrett & Emery, 1994, for evidence from neurophysiology studies). We argue that despite the potentially special processing that eye-gaze cues may undergo, their effects on spatial attention may often be equivalent to those of other types of directional cues.…”

“…We used a noninformative eye-gaze cue presented at central fixation (see, e.g., Friesen & Kingstone, 1998Friesen et al, 2004;Kingstone et al, 2000;Kingstone, Tipper, Ristic, & Ngan, 2004). After the cue (eyes looking laterally), a vibrotactile target was presented at varying stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs), with equal probability at the fingertip of the cued hand and at that of the opposite (uncued) hand.…”

The politics of attention: gaze-cuing effects are moderated by political temperament

“…Joint attention has been observed in individuals as young as 3 months (e.g., Scaife & Bruner, 1975) and is thought to be a critical first step in learning social interaction, given that gaze provides important information regarding an individual's interests and intent (e.g., Moore & Dunham, 1995). In adult populations, gaze cues have been shown to lead to reflexive shifts of attention in the direction consistent with gaze (e.g., Bayliss & Tipper, 2006;Driver et al, 1999;Friesen & Kingstone, 1998;Friesen, Ristic, & Kingstone, 2004;Kingstone, Tipper, Ristic, & Ngan, 2004). In the laboratory, these effects are typically demonstrated by presenting a nonpredictive cue at fixation that is a drawing/photograph of a face looking to the left or right.…”