Development of the functional visual field

Clohessy, Anne B.; Posner, Michael I.; Rothbart, Mary K.

doi:10.1016/s0001-6918(00)00026-3

Cited by 80 publications

(80 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Flanker tests of covert orienting are well-known in the infant (e.g., Clohessy et al, 2001), child (e.g., Wainwright & Bryson, 2002), and adult literature (e.g., Berlucchi, Chelazzi, & Tassinari, 2000), but fewer studies have been published to date reporting on the child ANT (Fan et al, 2002). In our affected (22q11) and unaffected (sibling) groups we found significant and independent effects of both flanker type and cue type, suggesting that the child ANT is an internally valid measure of covert orienting in both populations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Networks of Attention in Children With the 22q11 Deletion Syndrome

Sobin

Kiley-Brabeck

Daniels

et al. 2004

Developmental Neuropsychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 22q11 chromosomal deletion syndrome (22q11 DS) is associated with learning disabilities and a complex neuropsychological profile. Previous findings have suggested that executive attention deficits might underlie other neurocognitive anomalies. We administered the child Attention Network Test (ANT) to 52 children ages 5.0 to 11.5, 32 22q11 DS children (19 girls) and 20 controls (13 girls) and assessed the efficiency of segregated executive, orienting, and alerting networks. We hypothesized that 22q11 DS children have impaired executive network efficiency as compared to control siblings. The internal validity of the child ANT was confirmed for this population. Analysis of variance results showed significant main effects for flanker and cue types and no interaction effect in either 22q11 DS children or control siblings. Compared to control siblings, 22q11 DS children had significantly larger (less efficient) executive network scores, significantly increased errors on only incongruent trials, and a significant correlation between executive network scores and accuracy. The implications of these findings for future neurocognitive studies of 22q11 DS children are considered.The 22q11 deletion syndrome (22q11 DS) results from a meiotic deletion of DNA at the q11.2 site on chromosome 22 and its estimated prevalence is 1:4,000 (du Montcel, Mendizabal, Ayme, Sevy, & Philip, 1996). In over 90% of cases the deletion is not transmitted (Morrow et al., 1995). Congenital anomalies of widely varying severity can be associated with this condition and might include heart defects, immunologic deficits, craniofacial dysmorphologies, and velopharyngeal defects such as overt or submucous cleft palate (e.g., Ryan et al., 1997). Prior to identification of a single associated deletion, different clinical labels were used to indicate a given child's congenital anomalies, including DiGeorge Syndrome (primary immunologic deficit), Velo-Cardio-Facial-Syndrome (VCFS; velopharyngeal, heart, and facial anomalies), and Conotruncal Anomaly Face Syndrome (primary heart defect with facial dysmorphologies). Whereas the physical phenotype is heterogeneous, the neurocognitive profile is far more consistent. Researchers have estimated that 90% to 100% of 22q11 DS children are learning disabled (e.g., Lipson et al., 1991;Shprintzen, Goldberg, Young, & Walford, 1981) and hypotonic, with gross and fine motor dyscoordination, associated expressive language delays, attention impairment, and behavioral anomalies . Frank mental retardation is relatively rare and may be associated with prolonged anoxia during early cardiac failure. Of urgent concern, approximately 25% of 22q11 DS children are estimated to develop early adulthood schizophrenia (Murphy & Owen, 1996; Pulver et al., Copyright © 2004 The neurocognitive performance of 22q11 DS children is notably complex however and visuospatial memory deficits alone are unlikely to fully explain their profiles. In fact when a broader complement of abilities was examined additional areas of deficit were revea...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Networks of Attention in Children With the 22q11 Deletion Syndrome

Sobin

Kiley-Brabeck

Daniels

et al. 2004

Developmental Neuropsychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…By 4 months of age, infants learn to anticipate their attention to the location in which a particular stimulus embedded in a fixed sequence will appear [63]. This is thought to reflect EA given that it requires orienting attention voluntarily toward a particular location according to a repeated sequence of locations.…”

Section: Development Of Executive Attention: Behavioral Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

Early Development of Executive Attention

Conejero¹,

Rueda²

2017

J Child Adolesc Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Executive attention (EA) encompasses a variety of attention mechanisms implicated in the control of thoughts and behavior. The emergence of EA skills depends on the maturation of frontal brain structures. Evidence in the past years has shown that frontal brain structures related to EA are already functional in the first months of life and first signs of EA can be observed by the second half of the first year of life. Given the importance of EA to a wide range of developmental outcomes (e.g. academic and professional outcomes, socialization, psychological wellbeing, etc.), understanding early stages of development is of great interest for the promotion of EA and the prevention of EA-related deficits over the course of development. Despite its relevance, relatively little is known about the development of EA before the preschool years. This paper aims at providing a selective review of the existing literature about the early development of EA. We present the principal measures of EA for infants and toddlers available to date. We also review main findings on behavioral as well as brain mechanisms of EA in infancy and toddlerhood. Finally, we summarize research on early indicators of EA and its implication for the early detection of some developmental disorders.

show abstract

“…The experimental evidence also shows that in these tasks, contextual cues and their attentional effects emerge without awareness (Chun & Jiang, 1998;Jiang & Chun, 2001Jiang & Leung, 2005;Lewicki, Hill, & Czyzewska, 1997;Lewicki et al, 1992;Olson & Chun, 2002;Shanks, Channon, Wilkinson, & Curran, 2006) and result both in rapid shifting of attention to a location (e.g., Chun and Turke-Browne, 2007;Clohessy, Posner, & Rothbart, 2001;Jiang & Chun, 2001;Summerfield et al, 2006) and also to the enhanced processing of particular stimulus features (Bichot & Rossi, 2005;Kruschke, 1996;Maunsell & Treue, 2006;Rossi & Paradiso, 1995). The growing neuroscience evidence on cued attention also indicates that contextually cued enhancements of stimulus processing are pervasive across early sensory processing and higher level perceptual and cognitive systems (Beck & Kastner, 2009;Gilbert, Ito, Kapadia, & Westheimer, 2000;Pessoa, Kastner, & Ungerleider, 2003).…”

Section: Enhanced Processing Of Predicted Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 96%

Mechanisms of Cognitive Development: Domain-General Learning or Domain-Specific Constraints?

Sloutsky¹

2007

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Development of the functional visual field

Cited by 80 publications

References 19 publications

Networks of Attention in Children With the 22q11 Deletion Syndrome

Networks of Attention in Children With the 22q11 Deletion Syndrome

Early Development of Executive Attention

Mechanisms of Cognitive Development: Domain-General Learning or Domain-Specific Constraints?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About