These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Distinct roles of the intraparietal sulcus and temporoparietal junction in attentional capture from distractor features: An individual differences approach.
    Author: Painter DR, Dux PE, Mattingley JB.
    Journal: Neuropsychologia; 2015 Jul; 74():50-62. PubMed ID: 25724234.
    Abstract:
    Setting attention for an elementary visual feature, such as color or motion, results in greater spatial attentional "capture" from items with target compared with distractor features. Thus, capture is contingent on feature-based control settings. Neuroimaging studies suggest that this contingent attentional capture involves interactions between dorsal and ventral frontoparietal networks. To examine the distinct causal influences of these networks on contingent capture, we applied continuous theta-burst stimulation (cTBS) to alter neural excitability within the dorsal intraparietal sulcus (IPS), the ventral temporoparietal junction (TPJ) and a control site, visual area MT. Participants undertook an attentional capture task before and after stimulation, in which they made speeded responses to color-defined targets that were preceded by spatial cues in the target or distractor color. Cues appeared either at the target location (valid) or at a non-target location (invalid). Reaction times were slower for targets preceded by invalid compared with valid cues, demonstrating spatial attentional capture. Cues with the target color captured attention to a greater extent than those with the distractor color, consistent with contingent capture. Effects of cTBS were not evident at the group level, but emerged instead from analyses of individual differences. Target capture magnitude was positively correlated pre- and post-stimulation for all three cortical sites, suggesting that cTBS did not influence target capture. Conversely, distractor capture was positively correlated pre- and post-stimulation of MT, but uncorrelated for IPS and TPJ, suggesting that stimulation of IPS and TPJ selectively disrupted distractor capture. Additionally, the effects of IPS stimulation were predicted by pre-stimulation attentional capture, whereas the effects of TPJ stimulation were predicted by pre-stimulation distractor suppression. The results are consistent with the existence of distinct neural circuits underlying target and distractor capture, as well as distinct roles for the IPS and TPJ.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]