Literature DB >> 15701243

Attention and interhemispheric transfer: a behavioral and fMRI study.

B Weber1, V Treyer, N Oberholzer, T Jaermann, P Boesiger, P Brugger, M Regard, A Buck, S Savazzi, C A Marzi.   

Abstract

When both detections and responses to visual stimuli are performed within one and the same hemisphere, manual reaction times (RTs) are faster than when the two operations are carried out in different hemispheres. A widely accepted explanation for this difference is that it reflects the time lost in callosal transmission. Interhemispheric transfer time can be estimated by subtracting RTs for uncrossed from RTs for crossed responses (crossed-uncrossed difference, or CUD). In the present study, we wanted to ascertain the role of spatial attention in affecting the CUD and to chart the brain areas whose activity is related to these attentional effects on interhemispheric transfer. To accomplish this, we varied the proportion of crossed and uncrossed trials in different blocks. With this paradigm subjects are likely to focus attention either on the hemifield contralateral to the responding hand (blocks with 80% crossed trials) or on the ipsilateral hemifield (blocks with 80% uncrossed trials). We found an inverse correlation between the proportion of crossed trials in a block and the CUD and this effect can be attributed to spatial attention. As to the imaging results, we found that in the crossed minus uncrossed subtraction, an operation that highlights the neural processes underlying interhemispheric transfer, there was an activation of the genu of the corpus callosum as well as of a series of cortical areas. In a further commonality analysis, we assessed those areas which were activated specifically during focusing of attention onto one hemifield either contra- or ipsilateral to the responding hand. We found an activation of a number of cortical and subcortical areas, notably, parietal area BA 7 and the superior colliculi. We believe that the main thrust of the present study is to have teased apart areas important in interhemispheric transmission from those involved in spatial attention.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15701243     DOI: 10.1162/0898929052880002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci        ISSN: 0898-929X            Impact factor:   3.225


  46 in total

1.  Effects of trifluoromethylphenylpiperazine (TFMPP) on interhemispheric communication.

Authors:  HeeSeung Lee; Rob R Kydd; Vanessa K Lim; Ian J Kirk; Bruce R Russell
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2010-10-06       Impact factor: 4.530

2.  Visuo-motor pathways in humans revealed by event-related fMRI.

Authors:  Roberto Martuzzi; Micah M Murray; Philippe P Maeder; Eleonora Fornari; Jean- Philippe Thiran; Stephanie Clarke; Christoph M Michel; Reto A Meuli
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2005-11-24       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  The role of task history in simple reaction time to lateralized light flashes.

Authors:  Eric Mooshagian; Marco Iacoboni; Eran Zaidel
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2007-09-19       Impact factor: 3.139

4.  Interhemispheric transfer of phosphenes generated by occipital versus parietal transcranial magnetic stimulation.

Authors:  Carlo A Marzi; Francesca Mancini; Silvia Savazzi
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-07-29       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Differential impairment of interhemispheric transmission in bipolar disease.

Authors:  Vincenzo Florio; Silvia Savazzi; Andreas Conca; Carlo A Marzi
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2013-07-16       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 6.  Functional topography of the corpus callosum investigated by DTI and fMRI.

Authors:  Mara Fabri; Chiara Pierpaoli; Paolo Barbaresi; Gabriele Polonara
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2014-12-28

7.  Dissecting the neurofunctional bases of intentional action.

Authors:  Laura Zapparoli; Silvia Seghezzi; Paola Scifo; Alberto Zerbi; Giuseppe Banfi; Marco Tettamanti; Eraldo Paulesu
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-06-27       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Does experience in talking facilitate speech repetition?

Authors:  Linda I Shuster; Donna R Moore; Gang Chen; Dennis M Ruscello; William F Wonderlin
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2013-11-09       Impact factor: 6.556

9.  Individual Differences in Distinct Components of Attention are Linked to Anatomical Variations in Distinct White Matter Tracts.

Authors:  Sumit Niogi; Pratik Mukherjee; Jamshid Ghajar; Bruce D McCandliss
Journal:  Front Neuroanat       Date:  2010-02-22       Impact factor: 3.856

10.  BOLD correlates of trial-by-trial reaction time variability in gray and white matter: a multi-study fMRI analysis.

Authors:  Tal Yarkoni; Deanna M Barch; Jeremy R Gray; Thomas E Conturo; Todd S Braver
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-01-23       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.