Neural mechanisms of top-down control during spatial and feature attention

Giesbrecht, Barry; Woldorff, Marty G.; Song, Allen W.; Mangun, George R.

doi:10.1016/s1053-8119(03)00162-9

Cited by 355 publications

(348 citation statements)

References 77 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

285

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The more inferior medial activation of the precuneus corresponds closely to areas reported previously to be active during spatial attention and spatial working memory tasks [Corbetta et al, 1993;Giesbrecht et al, 2003;Owen et al, 1996] as well as during temporal orienting and combined spatial and temporal orienting [Coull and Nobre, 1998]. 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.…”

Section: Discussion Previewsupporting

confidence: 83%

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 Previewsupporting

confidence: 83%

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

“…Many previous studies have implicated these regions (particularly the DLPFC) in top-down control of processing, including the domains of selective attention (Mathalon et al, 2004;Milham et al, 2003), task-switching (Aron et al, 2004;Sussman et al, 2003), spatial attention (Giesbrecht et al, 2003;, sustained attention (Lawrence et al, 2003;Ortuno et al, 2002), emotional (Boshuisen et al, 2002;Milham et al, 2003), and autonomic control (Critchley et al, 2002(Critchley et al, , 2003. The finding that activation in this region (along with the right DLPFC) was significantly greater for No-go trials when compared to the Go trials is also consistent with the studies suggesting it monitors for response conflict Carter et al, 2001), whereby conflict signals the need for the allocation of additional control by the DLPFC (MacDonald et al, 2000).…”

Section: Pfc and Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond common resources: the cortical basis for resolving task interference

2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent studies have suggested that declining inhibitory control observed during simultaneous increases in working memory (WM) demands may be due to sharing common neural resources, although it is relatively unclear how these processes are successfully combined at a neural level. Event-related functional MRI was used to examine task performance that required inhibition of varying numbers of items held in WM. Common activation regions for WM and inhibition were observed and this functional overlap may constitute the cortical basis for task interference. However, maintaining successful inhibitory control under increasing WM demands tended not to increase activation in these overlapping regions as might be expected if these common areas reflect common resources essential for task performance. Instead, increased activation was observed predominantly in unique, inhibition-specific regions including dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. The finding that successfully maintaining weaker stimulus -response relationships in the face of competition from stronger, prepotent responses requires greater activity in these regions reveals the means by which the brain resolves task interference and supports theories of how top-down attentional control is implemented. D

show abstract

“…Interindividual differences in MFG activation may thus reflect different performance strategies, such that participants with lower activity had progressed to a more automatic performance mode. Parahippocampal gyrus activity increases with attention to shapes (Corbetta et al, 1991a;b); thus, lower activity with faster responding during anglediscriminations may, again, reflect performance benefits of an increasing automaticity. But left parahippocampal gyrus also activates with reading color words (Pulvermueller and Hauk, 2006), and right parahippocampal gyrus with color imagery (Howard et al, 1998).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Not surprisingly, brain regions displaying strongest activation during DIV included those taxed by top-down control of spatial and non-spatial (e.g. based on color) attentional selection, such as intraparietal sulcus and MFG (Hopfinger et al, 2000;Corbetta et al, 2000;Giesbrecht et al, 2003). However, control demands can differ greatly between different divided attention conditions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Divided versus selective attention: Evidence for common processing mechanisms

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study revisited the question of whether there are brain mechanisms specific to divided attention that differ from those used in selective attention. Increased neuronal activity required to simultaneously process two stimulus dimensions as compared with each separate dimension has often been observed, but rarely has activity induced by a divided attention condition exceeded the sum of activity induced by the component tasks. Healthy participants performed a selective-divided attention paradigm while undergoing functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI). The task required participants to make a same-different judgment about either one of two simultaneously presented stimulus dimensions, or about both dimensions. Performance accuracy was equated between tasks by dynamically adjusting the stimulus display time. Blood Oxygenation Level Dependent (BOLD) signal differences between tasks were identified by whole-brain voxel-wise comparisons and by region-specific analyses of all areas modulated by the divided attention task (DIV). No region displayed greater activation or deactivation by DIV than the sum of signal change by the two selective attention tasks. Instead, regional activity followed the tasks' processing demands as reflected by reaction time. Only a left cerebellar region displayed a correlation between participants' BOLD signal intensity and reaction time that was selective for DIV. The correlation was positive, reflecting slower responding with greater activation. Overall, the findings do not support the existence of functional brain activity specific to DIV. Increased activity appears to reflect additional processing demands by introducing a secondary task, but those demands do not appear to qualitatively differ from processes of selective attention. SectionCognitive and Behavioral Neuroscience

show abstract

Neural mechanisms of top-down control during spatial and feature attention

Cited by 355 publications

References 77 publications

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

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

Beyond common resources: the cortical basis for resolving task interference

Divided versus selective attention: Evidence for common processing mechanisms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About