Literature DB >> 21643719

Attention does more than modulate suppressive interactions: attending to multiple items.

Paige E Scalf1, Chandramalika Basak, Diane M Beck.   

Abstract

Directing attention to a visual item enhances its representations, making it more likely to guide behavior (Corbetta et al. 1991). Attention is thought to produce this enhancement by biasing suppressive interactions among multiple items in visual cortex in favor of the attended item (e.g., Desimone and Duncan 1995; Reynolds and Heeger 2009). We ask whether target enhancement and modulation of suppressive interactions are in fact inextricably linked or whether they can be decoupled. In particular, we ask whether simultaneously directing attention to multiple items may be one means of dissociating the influence of attention-related enhancement from the effects of inter-item suppression. When multiple items are attended, suppressive interactions in visual cortex limit the effectiveness with which attention may act on their representations, presumably because "biasing" the interactions in favor of a single item is no longer possible (Scalf and Beck 2010). In this experiment, we directly investigate whether applying attention to multiple competing stimulus items has any influence on either their evoked signal or their suppressive interactions. Both BOLD signal evoked by the items in V4 and behavioral responses to those items were significantly compromised by simultaneous presentation relative to simultaneous presentation, indicating that when the items appeared at the same time, they interacted in a mutually suppressive manner that compromised their ability to guide behavior. Attention significantly enhanced signal in V4. The attentional status of the items, however, had no influence on the suppressive effects of simultaneous presentation. To our knowledge, these data are the first to explicitly decouple the effects of top-down attention from those of inter-item suppression.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21643719     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-011-2730-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  62 in total

1.  Improved optimization for the robust and accurate linear registration and motion correction of brain images.

Authors:  Mark Jenkinson; Peter Bannister; Michael Brady; Stephen Smith
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 6.556

Review 2.  Visual attention as a multilevel selection process.

Authors:  Sabine Kastner; Mark A Pinsk
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 3.282

Review 3.  Advances in functional and structural MR image analysis and implementation as FSL.

Authors:  Stephen M Smith; Mark Jenkinson; Mark W Woolrich; Christian F Beckmann; Timothy E J Behrens; Heidi Johansen-Berg; Peter R Bannister; Marilena De Luca; Ivana Drobnjak; David E Flitney; Rami K Niazy; James Saunders; John Vickers; Yongyue Zhang; Nicola De Stefano; J Michael Brady; Paul M Matthews
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 6.556

4.  Statistical power calculations.

Authors:  R V Lenth
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2006-10-23       Impact factor: 3.159

5.  Flexible, capacity-limited activity of posterior parietal cortex in perceptual as well as visual short-term memory tasks.

Authors:  Daniel J Mitchell; Rhodri Cusack
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2007-11-27       Impact factor: 5.357

6.  The retinotopy of visual spatial attention.

Authors:  R B Tootell; N Hadjikhani; E K Hall; S Marrett; W Vanduffel; J T Vaughan; A M Dale
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 17.173

7.  Responses of neurons in inferior temporal cortex during memory-guided visual search.

Authors:  L Chelazzi; J Duncan; E K Miller; R Desimone
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  Lateral inhibition between orientation detectors in the cat's visual cortex.

Authors:  C Blakemore; E A Tobin
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1972       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Competition in visual cortex impedes attention to multiple items.

Authors:  Paige E Scalf; Diane M Beck
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2010-01-06       Impact factor: 6.167

10.  Central V4 receptive fields are scaled by the V1 cortical magnification and correspond to a constant-sized sampling of the V1 surface.

Authors:  Brad C Motter
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2009-05-06       Impact factor: 6.167

View more
  1 in total

1.  Competition explains limited attention and perceptual resources: implications for perceptual load and dilution theories.

Authors:  Paige E Scalf; Ana Torralbo; Evelina Tapia; Diane M Beck
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2013-05-10
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.