Literature DB >> 17135471

Warning signals influence motor processing.

Jillian H Fecteau1, Douglas P Munoz.   

Abstract

When observers initiate responses to visual targets, they do so sooner when a preceding stimulus indicates that the target will appear shortly. This consequence of a warning signal may change neural activity in one of four ways. On the sensory side, the warning signal may speed up the rate at which the target is registered by the brain or enhance the magnitude of its signal. On the motor end, the warning signal may lower the threshold required to initiate a response or speed up the rate at which activity accumulates to reach threshold. Here, we describe which explanation is better supported. To accomplish this end, monkeys performed different versions of a cue-target task while we monitored the activity of visuomotor and motor neurons in the superior colliculus. Although the cue target task was designed to measure the properties of reflexive spatial attention, there are two events in this task that produce nonspecific warning effects: a central reorienting event (brightening of central fixation marker) that is used to direct attention away from the cue, and the presentation of the cue itself. Monopolizing on these tendencies, we show that warning effects are associated with several changes in neural activity: the target-related response is enhanced, the threshold for initiating a saccade is lowered, and the rate at which activity accumulates toward threshold rises faster. Ultimately, the accumulation of activity toward threshold predicted behavior most closely. In the discussion, we describe the implications and limitations of these data for theories of warning effects and potential avenues for future research.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17135471     DOI: 10.1152/jn.00978.2005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurophysiol        ISSN: 0022-3077            Impact factor:   2.714


  17 in total

1.  Reduced intracortical inhibition during the foreperiod of a warned reaction time task.

Authors:  Craig Sinclair; Geoffrey R Hammond
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2007-12-12       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Excitatory and inhibitory processes in primary motor cortex during the foreperiod of a warned reaction time task are unrelated to response expectancy.

Authors:  Craig Sinclair; Geoffrey R Hammond
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-01-13       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Dual LATER-unit model predicts saccadic reaction time distributions in gap, step and appearance tasks.

Authors:  Giles W Story; R H S Carpenter
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-11-05       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Motor selection dynamics in FEF explain the reaction time variance of saccades to single targets.

Authors:  Christopher K Hauser; Dantong Zhu; Terrence R Stanford; Emilio Salinas
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2018-04-13       Impact factor: 8.140

5.  Role of supplementary eye field in saccade initiation: executive, not direct, control.

Authors:  Veit Stuphorn; Joshua W Brown; Jeffrey D Schall
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2009-11-25       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  The unknown but knowable relationship between Presaccadic Accumulation of activity and Saccade initiation.

Authors:  Jeffrey D Schall; Martin Paré
Journal:  J Comput Neurosci       Date:  2021-03-12       Impact factor: 1.621

7.  Response times from ensembles of accumulators.

Authors:  Bram Zandbelt; Braden A Purcell; Thomas J Palmeri; Gordon D Logan; Jeffrey D Schall
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-02-03       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Temporal expectancy modulates phasic alerting in both detection and discrimination tasks.

Authors:  Shena Lu; Wei Wang; Yongchun Cai
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2015-02

Review 9.  Neural mechanisms of saccade target selection: gated accumulator model of the visual-motor cascade.

Authors:  Jeffrey D Schall; Braden A Purcell; Richard P Heitz; Gordon D Logan; Thomas J Palmeri
Journal:  Eur J Neurosci       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 3.386

10.  Temporal Expectation Hastens Decision Onset But Does Not Affect Evidence Quality.

Authors:  Ruud L van den Brink; Peter R Murphy; Kobe Desender; Nicole de Ru; Sander Nieuwenhuis
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2020-11-10       Impact factor: 6.167

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.