Abstract
Spatial cueing has been used by many different groups under multiple forms to study spatial attention processes. We will present evidence obtained in brain-damaged patients and healthy volunteers using a variant of this paradigm, the hybrid spatial cueing paradigm, which, besides single-target trials with valid and invalid cues, also contains trials where a target is accompanied by a contralateral competing stimulus (competition trials). This allows one to study invalidity-related processes and selection between competing stimuli within the same paradigm. In brain-damaged patients, lesions confined to the intraparietal sulcus result in contralesional attentional deficits, both during competition and invalid trials, according to a pattern that does not differ from that observed following inferior parietal lesions. In healthy volunteers, however, selection between competing stimuli and invalidity-related processes are partially dissociable, the former relying mainly on cytoarchitectonic areas hIP1-3 in the intraparietal sulcus, the latter on cytoarchitectonic area PF in the right inferior parietal lobule. The activity profile in more posterior inferior parietal areas PFm and PGa, does not distinguish between both types of trials. The functional account for right PF and adjacent areas is further constrained by the activity profile observed during other experimental paradigms. In a change detection task with variable target and distracter set size, for example, these inferior parietal areas show highest activity when the stimulus array consists of only one single target, while the intraparietal sulcus show increased activity as the array contains more targets and distracters. Together, these findings lead us to the hypothesis that right PF functions as a target singleton detector, which is activated when a target stands out from the background, referring both to the temporal background (expectancy) and the momentaneous background (stimulus-driven saliency).
Highlights
Spatial attention encompasses a wide set of divergent processes that govern the distribution of attentional weights over locations that are, or may be, occupied by objects
Are these human cytoarchitectonic areas differentially involved in competition vs. invalid trials (Gillebert et al, 2013) when controlling for expectancy? To answer this question, we applied a dual approach: starting from the cytoarchitectonical divisions, we defined volumes of interest and compared the aggregate response amplitude between the single target trials, the competition trials and the invalid trials in the hybrid spatial cueing paradigm
INVALIDITY, COMPETITION, AND CONNECTIVITY we evaluated to which degree the different cytoarchitectonic areas belong to different resting-state networks (Gillebert et al, 2013)
Summary
Spatial attention encompasses a wide set of divergent processes that govern the distribution of attentional weights over locations that are, or may be, occupied by objects. The attentional priority map refers to a topographic representation of attentional weights (Bushnell et al, 1981; Koch and Ullman, 1985; Colby et al, 1996; Gottlieb et al, 1998; Itti and Koch, 2001; Bisley and Goldberg, 2003; Vandenberghe and Gillebert, 2009; Ptak, 2012; Jerde and Curtis, 2013). The attentional weights depend, among other variables, on sensory evidence (Bundesen and Habekost, 2008) obtained through multiple input channels (visual, auditory, · · · ). We will describe novel evidence obtained using two paradigms, the hybrid spatial cueing paradigm (Gillebert et al, 2011, 2012a, 2013) and the change detection paradigm with varying target and distracter set size (Gillebert et al, 2012b), in patients (Gillebert et al, 2011) and in the intact brain (Gillebert et al, 2012a,b, 2013), both from a localizationist and a connectionist perspective
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
