Literature DB >> 22306518

The Premotor theory of attention: time to move on?

Daniel T Smith1, Thomas Schenk.   

Abstract

Spatial attention and eye-movements are tightly coupled, but the precise nature of this coupling is controversial. The influential but controversial Premotor theory of attention makes four specific predictions about the relationship between motor preparation and spatial attention. Firstly, spatial attention and motor preparation use the same neural substrates. Secondly, spatial attention is functionally equivalent to planning goal directed actions such as eye-movements (i.e. planning an action is both necessary and sufficient for a shift of spatial attention). Thirdly, planning a goal directed action with any effector system is sufficient to trigger a shift of spatial attention. Fourthly, the eye-movement system has a privileged role in orienting visual spatial attention. This article reviews empirical studies that have tested these predictions. Contrary to predictions one and two there is evidence of anatomical and functional dissociations between endogenous spatial attention and motor preparation. However, there is compelling evidence that exogenous attention is reliant on activation of the oculomotor system. With respect to the third prediction, there is correlational evidence that spatial attention is directed to the endpoint of goal-directed actions but no direct evidence that this attention shift is dependent on motor preparation. The few studies to have directly tested the fourth prediction have produced conflicting results, so the extent to which the oculomotor system has a privileged role in spatial attention remains unclear. Overall, the evidence is not consistent with the view that spatial attention is functionally equivalent to motor preparation so the Premotor theory should be rejected, although a limited version of the Premotor theory in which only exogenous attention is dependent on motor preparation may still be tenable. A plausible alternative account is that activity in the motor system contributes to biased competition between different sensory representations with the winner of the competition becoming the attended item.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22306518     DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2012.01.025

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuropsychologia        ISSN: 0028-3932            Impact factor:   3.139


  49 in total

1.  Time course of motor preparation during visual search with flexible stimulus-response association.

Authors:  Husam A Katnani; Neeraj J Gandhi
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2013-06-12       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Movement planning and attentional control of visuospatial working memory: evidence from a grasp-to-place task.

Authors:  M A Spiegel; D Koester; T Schack
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2013-07-06

3.  Sustained visuospatial attention enhances lateralized anticipatory ERP activity in sensory areas.

Authors:  Francesco Di Russo; Marika Berchicci; Valentina Bianco; Elena Mussini; Rinaldo Livio Perri; Sabrina Pitzalis; Federico Quinzi; Sara Tranquilli; Donatella Spinelli
Journal:  Brain Struct Funct       Date:  2021-01-03       Impact factor: 3.270

4.  Shared attention for smooth pursuit and saccades.

Authors:  Zhenlan Jin; Adam Reeves; Scott N J Watamaniuk; Stephen J Heinen
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2013-03-13       Impact factor: 2.240

5.  The distribution of spatial attention changes with task demands during goal-directed reaching.

Authors:  Heidi Long; Anna Ma-Wyatt
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2014-03-06       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Spontaneous microsaccades reflect shifts in covert attention.

Authors:  Shlomit Yuval-Greenberg; Elisha P Merriam; David J Heeger
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2014-10-08       Impact factor: 6.167

7.  Spiking Suppression Precedes Cued Attentional Enhancement of Neural Responses in Primary Visual Cortex.

Authors:  Michele A Cox; Kacie Dougherty; Geoffrey K Adams; Eric A Reavis; Jacob A Westerberg; Brandon S Moore; David A Leopold; Alexander Maier
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2019-01-01       Impact factor: 5.357

8.  Motor and Visuospatial Attention and Motor Planning After Stroke: Considerations for the Rehabilitation of Standing Balance and Gait.

Authors:  Sue Peters; Todd C Handy; Bimal Lakhani; Lara A Boyd; S Jayne Garland
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2015-04-30

9.  Extraocular muscle afferent signals modulate visual attention.

Authors:  Daniela Balslev; William Newman; Paul C Knox
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2012-10-09       Impact factor: 4.799

Review 10.  Orienting of attention: Then and now.

Authors:  Michael I Posner
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2014-08-30       Impact factor: 2.143

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.