Cargando…

Differences between endogenous attention to spatial locations and sensory modalities

Vibell et al. (J Cogn Neurosci 19:109–120, 2007) reported that endogenously attending to a sensory modality (vision or touch) modulated perceptual processing, in part, by the relative speeding-up of neural activation (i.e., as a result of prior entry). However, it was unclear whether it was the fine...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vibell, J., Klinge, C., Zampini, M., Nobre, A. C., Spence, C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5603640/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28717820
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00221-017-5030-4
_version_ 1783264741506940928
author Vibell, J.
Klinge, C.
Zampini, M.
Nobre, A. C.
Spence, C.
author_facet Vibell, J.
Klinge, C.
Zampini, M.
Nobre, A. C.
Spence, C.
author_sort Vibell, J.
collection PubMed
description Vibell et al. (J Cogn Neurosci 19:109–120, 2007) reported that endogenously attending to a sensory modality (vision or touch) modulated perceptual processing, in part, by the relative speeding-up of neural activation (i.e., as a result of prior entry). However, it was unclear whether it was the fine temporal discrimination required by the temporal-order judgment task that was used, or rather, the type of attentional modulation (spatial locations or sensory modalities) that was responsible for the shift in latencies that they observed. The present study used a similar experimental design to evaluate whether spatial attention would also yield similar latency effects suggestive of prior entry in the early visual P1 potentials. Intriguingly, while the results demonstrate similar neural latency shifts attributable to spatial attention, they started at a somewhat later stage than seen in Vibell et al.’s study. These differences are consistent with different neural mechanisms underlying attention to a specific sensory modality versus to a spatial location.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5603640
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56036402017-10-03 Differences between endogenous attention to spatial locations and sensory modalities Vibell, J. Klinge, C. Zampini, M. Nobre, A. C. Spence, C. Exp Brain Res Research Article Vibell et al. (J Cogn Neurosci 19:109–120, 2007) reported that endogenously attending to a sensory modality (vision or touch) modulated perceptual processing, in part, by the relative speeding-up of neural activation (i.e., as a result of prior entry). However, it was unclear whether it was the fine temporal discrimination required by the temporal-order judgment task that was used, or rather, the type of attentional modulation (spatial locations or sensory modalities) that was responsible for the shift in latencies that they observed. The present study used a similar experimental design to evaluate whether spatial attention would also yield similar latency effects suggestive of prior entry in the early visual P1 potentials. Intriguingly, while the results demonstrate similar neural latency shifts attributable to spatial attention, they started at a somewhat later stage than seen in Vibell et al.’s study. These differences are consistent with different neural mechanisms underlying attention to a specific sensory modality versus to a spatial location. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2017-07-17 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5603640/ /pubmed/28717820 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00221-017-5030-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Research Article
Vibell, J.
Klinge, C.
Zampini, M.
Nobre, A. C.
Spence, C.
Differences between endogenous attention to spatial locations and sensory modalities
title Differences between endogenous attention to spatial locations and sensory modalities
title_full Differences between endogenous attention to spatial locations and sensory modalities
title_fullStr Differences between endogenous attention to spatial locations and sensory modalities
title_full_unstemmed Differences between endogenous attention to spatial locations and sensory modalities
title_short Differences between endogenous attention to spatial locations and sensory modalities
title_sort differences between endogenous attention to spatial locations and sensory modalities
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5603640/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28717820
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00221-017-5030-4
work_keys_str_mv AT vibellj differencesbetweenendogenousattentiontospatiallocationsandsensorymodalities
AT klingec differencesbetweenendogenousattentiontospatiallocationsandsensorymodalities
AT zampinim differencesbetweenendogenousattentiontospatiallocationsandsensorymodalities
AT nobreac differencesbetweenendogenousattentiontospatiallocationsandsensorymodalities
AT spencec differencesbetweenendogenousattentiontospatiallocationsandsensorymodalities