Voluntary Attention Modulates fMRI Activity in Human MT–MST

O’Craven, Kathleen M.; Rosen, Bruce R.; Kwong, Kenneth K.; Treisman, Anne; Savoy, Robert L.

doi:10.1016/s0896-6273(00)80300-1

Cited by 427 publications

(276 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

243

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, attentional modulation of lexical influences can also be accomplished by modulation of lexical activity [54], leaving the interactive architecture in place. In fact, modulation of lexical activity rather than lexical feedback is consistent with findings suggesting that attentional modulation operates by affecting neural responsiveness to input [57][58][59].…”

Section: Attentional Modulation Of Lexical Effectssupporting

confidence: 86%

Are there interactive processes in speech perception?

McClelland

Mirman

Holt

2006

Trends in Cognitive Sciences

231

191

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lexical information facilitates speech perception, especially when sounds are ambiguous or degraded. The interactive approach to understanding this effect posits that this facilitation is accomplished through bi-directional flow of information, allowing lexical knowledge to influence pre-lexical processes. Alternative autonomous theories posit feed-forward processing with lexical influence restricted to post-perceptual decision processes. We review evidence supporting the prediction of interactive models that lexical influences can affect pre-lexical mechanisms, triggering compensation, adaptation and retuning of phonological processes generally taken to be pre-lexical. We argue that these and other findings point to interactive processing as a fundamental principle for perception of speech and other modalities.

show abstract

Section: Attentional Modulation Of Lexical Effectssupporting

confidence: 86%

Are there interactive processes in speech perception?

McClelland

Mirman

Holt

2006

Trends in Cognitive Sciences

231

191

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Color was selected as a ventral stream feature and motion direction as a dorsal stream feature. Color has been reported to be processed prominently in ventral stream area V4 (e.g., Corbetta et al, 1991), and motion direction has been reported to be processed in dorsal stream area MT (e.g., Albright, 1984;O'Craven et al, 1997). If the change detection systems for ventral and dorsal stream features have a similar functional organization, then it should be expected that a change in motion direction is also manifested by the change positivity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Independent processing of visual stimulus changes in ventral and dorsal stream features indexed by an early positive difference in event-related brain potentials

Kimura

Katayama

Murohashi

2006

International Journal of Psychophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In event-related brain potential (ERP) studies of brain activity using a visual S1-S2 matching task, change stimuli elicit a posterior positive component with a latency of 100-200 ms. To elucidate the hierarchical organization of the processing of a visual stimulus change based on multiple stimulus features, ERPs were recorded in 12 participants performing an S1-S2 matching task with stimuli defined by color (mediated by the ventral stream) and motion direction (mediated by the dorsal stream). Each trial consisted of two sequentially presented stimuli (S1-S2), where S2 was either (1) the same as S1 (i.e., no-change), (2) different from S1 in color only (color change), (3) different in motion direction only (motion direction change), or (4) different in both color and motion direction (color-motion direction change). These trials were presented in random order with equal probability, and the participants were asked to respond to one of these trials in separate blocks.Relative to the no-change stimulus, the three types of change stimuli elicited posterior positivities.The scalp-topography of change positivities differed according to the feature changed. In addition, the amplitude and scalp-topography of change positivities in response to a conjunction change were the respective sums of those in response to changes in the corresponding single features.These results suggest that the change detection system reflected by the change positivity is separate for each feature dimension, and these operate independently.

show abstract

“…It is now well established that attention modulates neural activity in extrastriate visual areas such as V2, V4, and MT (13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27). However, many of these same studies found little or no attentional modulation in V1 (13,(18)(19)(20)(25)(26)(27).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, many of these same studies found little or no attentional modulation in V1 (13,(18)(19)(20)(25)(26)(27). One study (23) found some response elevation in V1 during reward stimulus presentation; however, such an effect may result from general arousal.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Functional MRI reveals spatially specific attentional modulation in human primary visual cortex

Somers

Dale

Seiffert

et al. 1999

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

607

361

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Selective visual attention can strongly inf luence perceptual processing, even for apparently low-level visual stimuli. Although it is largely accepted that attention modulates neural activity in extrastriate visual cortex, the extent to which attention operates in the first cortical stage, striate visual cortex (area V1), remains controversial. Here, functional MRI was used at high field strength (3 T) to study humans during attentionally demanding visual discriminations. Similar, robust attentional modulations were observed in both striate and extrastriate cortical areas. Functional mapping of cortical retinotopy demonstrates that attentional modulations were spatially specific, enhancing responses to attended stimuli and suppressing responses when attention was directed elsewhere. The spatial pattern of modulation reveals a complex attentional window that is consistent with object-based attention but is inconsistent with a simple attentional spotlight. These data suggest that neural processing in V1 is not governed simply by sensory stimulation, but, like extrastriate regions, V1 can be strongly and specifically inf luenced by attention.It has long been appreciated that selective attention can dramatically affect high-level visual perception (1). More recently, attention has been shown to influence low-level visual phenomena such as luminance detection (2, 3), motion perception (4, 5), orientation discrimination (6), contour detection (7), hyperacuity (6), and even "preattentive" visual search (8). These modulations of perception appear to result from selective spatial attention, because they depend on the location of directed attention. These studies exploited the fact that attention and eye position need not be directed to the same location; that is, attention may be covert (2). Under the same fixation conditions attention may be either directed toward a test stimulus, directed elsewhere, or not directed. Striking differences have been revealed when performance under directed attention is compared with performance when attention is engaged in a highly distracting task, such as identifying letters in a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) stream (5, 8, 9).These phenomena indicate that attention operates at low levels of visual processing, but they do not identify the specific cortical areas in which processing is influenced by attention. This question of the locus of selection is fundamental to the cognitive neuroscience of attention. Theories suggest that processing of the attended representation is enhanced and͞or that processing of unattended representations is suppressed. Enhancement and suppression may act directly on cells in the lower tiers of visual cortex that code retinotopic location or may act at higher cortical areas (10). One long-held theory, the spotlight model of spatial selection (2, 11), suggests that attention is directed to a connected visual field region that contains no topological holes. A competing theory, objectbased selection (12), suggests that attention is directed to ...

show abstract

Voluntary Attention Modulates fMRI Activity in Human MT–MST

Cited by 427 publications

References 32 publications

Are there interactive processes in speech perception?

Are there interactive processes in speech perception?

Independent processing of visual stimulus changes in ventral and dorsal stream features indexed by an early positive difference in event-related brain potentials

Functional MRI reveals spatially specific attentional modulation in human primary visual cortex

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About