Differential activation of frontoparietal attention networks by social and symbolic spatial cues.

Center for the Study of Brain Mind and Behavior, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08540, USA.
Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience (Impact Factor: 5.04). 03/2010; 5(4):432-40. DOI: 10.1093/scan/nsq008
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Perception of both gaze-direction and symbolic directional cues (e.g. arrows) orient an observer's attention toward the indicated location. It is unclear, however, whether these similar behavioral effects are examples of the same attentional phenomenon and, therefore, subserved by the same neural substrate. It has been proposed that gaze, given its evolutionary significance, constitutes a 'special' category of spatial cue. As such, it is predicted that the neural systems supporting spatial reorienting will be different for gaze than for non-biological symbols. We tested this prediction using functional magnetic resonance imaging to measure the brain's response during target localization in which laterally presented targets were preceded by uninformative gaze or arrow cues. Reaction times were faster during valid than invalid trials for both arrow and gaze cues. However, differential patterns of activity were evoked in the brain. Trials including invalid rather than valid arrow cues resulted in a stronger hemodynamic response in the ventral attention network. No such difference was seen during trials including valid and invalid gaze cues. This differential engagement of the ventral reorienting network is consistent with the notion that the facilitation of target detection by gaze cues and arrow cues is subserved by different neural substrates.

1 Bookmark
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Gaze and arrows automatically trigger attentional shifts. Neuroimaging studies have identified a commonality in the spatial distribution of the neural activation involved in such attentional shifts. However, it remains unknown whether these activations occur with common temporal profiles. To investigate this issue, magnetoencephalography (MEG) was used to evaluate neural activation involved in attentional shifts induced by gaze and arrows. MEG source reconstruction analyses revealed that the superior temporal sulcus and the inferior frontal gyrus were commonly activated after 200 ms, in response to directional versus non-directional cues. Regression analyses further revealed that the magnitude of brain activity in these areas and in the bilateral occipital cortex was positively related to the effect of attentional shift on reaction times under both the gaze and the arrow conditions. The results also revealed that some brain regions were activated specifically in response to directional versus non-directional gaze or arrow cues at the 350–400-ms time window. These results suggest that the neural mechanisms underlying attentional shifts induced by gaze and arrows share commonalities in their spatial distributions and temporal profiles, with some spatial differences at later time stages.
    Neuroscience Research. 01/2014;
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Gaze and arrow cues automatically orient visual attention, even when they have no predictive value, but the neural circuitry by which they direct attention is not clear. Recent evidence has indicated that the ventral frontoparietal attention network is primarily engaged by breaches of a viewer's cue-related expectations (Corbetta, Patel, & Shulman, 2008). Accordingly, we hypothesized that to the extent that nonpredictive gaze and arrow cues automatically engender expectations with regard to cue location, they should activate the ventral attention network when they cue attention invalidly. Using event-related fMRI, we found that invalid gaze but not arrow cues activated the ventral attention network, specifically in the area of the right temporal parietal junction (TPJ), as well as nodes along the dorsal attention network associated with a redirection of attention to the correct target location. In additional whole-brain analyses, facilitation of behavioral response time by valid gaze cues was linearly associated with the degree of activation in the right TPJ. We conclude from our findings that gaze direction elicits potent expectations in humans with regard to an actor's intention that engage attention networks if not differently from, at least more robustly than, arrow cues.
    Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience 04/2014; · 5.04 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In highly social groups like human and non human primates, gaze and pointing cues are fundamentally important for directing the attention of conspecifics. Although neuroimaging studies indicate that shifts of attention triggered by observation of social cues activate the onlookers’ fronto-parietal cortices, information on whether these regions play a causative role in orienting and re-orienting of social attention is lacking. To advance our understanding of this, we used event-related repetitive dual pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation to interfere with neural activity in the right frontal eye field (rFEF) and posterior parietal cortex (rPPC). This procedure allowed us to explore how inhibiting rFEF and rPPC influences shifts of attention triggered by the observation of body-related (gaze and hand) and non body-related (arrow) directional distractors. Participants were asked to perform a leftward or rightward pointing movement according to the color change of a central imperative signal while ignoring a distractor, which was either a gaze, a pointing hand or an arrow. Stimulation of rPPC in a region supposedly linked to attentional re-orienting and to planning and execution of upper limb movements increased the reflexive tendency to follow distracting pointing hands but not oriented gaze or arrows. These findings suggest that inhibition of cortical structures that control attentional shifts triggered by social stimuli brings forth an increase of the cost of attentional re-orienting. Moreover, our results provide the first causative evidence that reflexive social attention in humans may be coded according to body-part-centered frames of reference.
    Neuropsychologia 01/2014; · 3.48 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 20, 2014