Distinguishing subcortical and cortical influences in visual attention: Subcortical attentional processing

David H. Zackon, Evanne J. Casson, Lew Stelmach, Jocelyn Faubert, Lyne Racette

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose. The purpose of the study was to investigate the role of subcortical processing in human visual attention. The midbrain contribution to visual attention is unclear. Although evidence exists for a subcortical attentional advantage in ocular motor tasks, such an advantage has not been shown in perceptual tasks. Because retinotectal projections arise predominantly from nasal retina (i.e., temporal hemifield), subcortical attention should be distributed asymmetrically for monocular viewing conditions with an advantage to the temporal hemifield. Method. To test for a subcortical attentional effect, the authors compared the results of binocular and monocular viewing conditions using the split priming motion induction paradigm. In this perceptual attention paradigm, priming cues are presented to the left and right of fixation followed by an instantaneously presented horizontal bar. As a result of attention to the priming cues, motion is perceived within the bar as it appears to draw in from the two lateral cues toward a central collision point. Asymmetrically distributed attention results in an asymmctry in the perception of motion within the bar, and thus the perceived collision point will be shifted away from the center. Results. In two separate studies, one with and one without control of eye movement, the authors found significant differences between the results for monocular and binocular presentation. When the stimulus configuration is presented to the left eye, the perceived collision point is shifted toward the center consistent with a subcortical attentional effect. However, presentation of the stimulus configuration to the right eye yields the same results as those of binocular presentation. Conclusions. This pattern of results can be explained by a separate and additive interaction between cortical and subcortical attentional effects in the visual field. Dominance of the left visual field for cortical attention and dominance of the temporal visual field for subcortical attention act together when the initial priming cue occurs in the temporal (left) visual field of the left eye. However, these influences complete when the same stimulus configuration is presented to the right eye, where cortical attention predominates in the left visual field and subcortical attention predominates in the temporal (right) visual field.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)364-371
Number of pages8
JournalInvestigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science
Volume38
Issue number2
StatePublished - 1997
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Visual Fields
Cues
Motion Perception
Eye Movements
Mesencephalon
Nose
Retina

Keywords

  • motion induction
  • parietal lobe
  • superior colliculus
  • visual attention
  • visual pathways

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology

Cite this

Distinguishing subcortical and cortical influences in visual attention : Subcortical attentional processing. / Zackon, David H.; Casson, Evanne J.; Stelmach, Lew; Faubert, Jocelyn; Racette, Lyne.

In: Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Vol. 38, No. 2, 1997, p. 364-371.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Zackon, David H. ; Casson, Evanne J. ; Stelmach, Lew ; Faubert, Jocelyn ; Racette, Lyne. / Distinguishing subcortical and cortical influences in visual attention : Subcortical attentional processing. In: Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science. 1997 ; Vol. 38, No. 2. pp. 364-371.
@article{455f6d4ab78444df874790e0b566f405,
title = "Distinguishing subcortical and cortical influences in visual attention: Subcortical attentional processing",
abstract = "Purpose. The purpose of the study was to investigate the role of subcortical processing in human visual attention. The midbrain contribution to visual attention is unclear. Although evidence exists for a subcortical attentional advantage in ocular motor tasks, such an advantage has not been shown in perceptual tasks. Because retinotectal projections arise predominantly from nasal retina (i.e., temporal hemifield), subcortical attention should be distributed asymmetrically for monocular viewing conditions with an advantage to the temporal hemifield. Method. To test for a subcortical attentional effect, the authors compared the results of binocular and monocular viewing conditions using the split priming motion induction paradigm. In this perceptual attention paradigm, priming cues are presented to the left and right of fixation followed by an instantaneously presented horizontal bar. As a result of attention to the priming cues, motion is perceived within the bar as it appears to draw in from the two lateral cues toward a central collision point. Asymmetrically distributed attention results in an asymmctry in the perception of motion within the bar, and thus the perceived collision point will be shifted away from the center. Results. In two separate studies, one with and one without control of eye movement, the authors found significant differences between the results for monocular and binocular presentation. When the stimulus configuration is presented to the left eye, the perceived collision point is shifted toward the center consistent with a subcortical attentional effect. However, presentation of the stimulus configuration to the right eye yields the same results as those of binocular presentation. Conclusions. This pattern of results can be explained by a separate and additive interaction between cortical and subcortical attentional effects in the visual field. Dominance of the left visual field for cortical attention and dominance of the temporal visual field for subcortical attention act together when the initial priming cue occurs in the temporal (left) visual field of the left eye. However, these influences complete when the same stimulus configuration is presented to the right eye, where cortical attention predominates in the left visual field and subcortical attention predominates in the temporal (right) visual field.",
keywords = "motion induction, parietal lobe, superior colliculus, visual attention, visual pathways",
author = "Zackon, {David H.} and Casson, {Evanne J.} and Lew Stelmach and Jocelyn Faubert and Lyne Racette",
year = "1997",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "38",
pages = "364--371",
journal = "Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science",
issn = "0146-0404",
publisher = "Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Distinguishing subcortical and cortical influences in visual attention

T2 - Subcortical attentional processing

AU - Zackon, David H.

AU - Casson, Evanne J.

AU - Stelmach, Lew

AU - Faubert, Jocelyn

AU - Racette, Lyne

PY - 1997

Y1 - 1997

N2 - Purpose. The purpose of the study was to investigate the role of subcortical processing in human visual attention. The midbrain contribution to visual attention is unclear. Although evidence exists for a subcortical attentional advantage in ocular motor tasks, such an advantage has not been shown in perceptual tasks. Because retinotectal projections arise predominantly from nasal retina (i.e., temporal hemifield), subcortical attention should be distributed asymmetrically for monocular viewing conditions with an advantage to the temporal hemifield. Method. To test for a subcortical attentional effect, the authors compared the results of binocular and monocular viewing conditions using the split priming motion induction paradigm. In this perceptual attention paradigm, priming cues are presented to the left and right of fixation followed by an instantaneously presented horizontal bar. As a result of attention to the priming cues, motion is perceived within the bar as it appears to draw in from the two lateral cues toward a central collision point. Asymmetrically distributed attention results in an asymmctry in the perception of motion within the bar, and thus the perceived collision point will be shifted away from the center. Results. In two separate studies, one with and one without control of eye movement, the authors found significant differences between the results for monocular and binocular presentation. When the stimulus configuration is presented to the left eye, the perceived collision point is shifted toward the center consistent with a subcortical attentional effect. However, presentation of the stimulus configuration to the right eye yields the same results as those of binocular presentation. Conclusions. This pattern of results can be explained by a separate and additive interaction between cortical and subcortical attentional effects in the visual field. Dominance of the left visual field for cortical attention and dominance of the temporal visual field for subcortical attention act together when the initial priming cue occurs in the temporal (left) visual field of the left eye. However, these influences complete when the same stimulus configuration is presented to the right eye, where cortical attention predominates in the left visual field and subcortical attention predominates in the temporal (right) visual field.

AB - Purpose. The purpose of the study was to investigate the role of subcortical processing in human visual attention. The midbrain contribution to visual attention is unclear. Although evidence exists for a subcortical attentional advantage in ocular motor tasks, such an advantage has not been shown in perceptual tasks. Because retinotectal projections arise predominantly from nasal retina (i.e., temporal hemifield), subcortical attention should be distributed asymmetrically for monocular viewing conditions with an advantage to the temporal hemifield. Method. To test for a subcortical attentional effect, the authors compared the results of binocular and monocular viewing conditions using the split priming motion induction paradigm. In this perceptual attention paradigm, priming cues are presented to the left and right of fixation followed by an instantaneously presented horizontal bar. As a result of attention to the priming cues, motion is perceived within the bar as it appears to draw in from the two lateral cues toward a central collision point. Asymmetrically distributed attention results in an asymmctry in the perception of motion within the bar, and thus the perceived collision point will be shifted away from the center. Results. In two separate studies, one with and one without control of eye movement, the authors found significant differences between the results for monocular and binocular presentation. When the stimulus configuration is presented to the left eye, the perceived collision point is shifted toward the center consistent with a subcortical attentional effect. However, presentation of the stimulus configuration to the right eye yields the same results as those of binocular presentation. Conclusions. This pattern of results can be explained by a separate and additive interaction between cortical and subcortical attentional effects in the visual field. Dominance of the left visual field for cortical attention and dominance of the temporal visual field for subcortical attention act together when the initial priming cue occurs in the temporal (left) visual field of the left eye. However, these influences complete when the same stimulus configuration is presented to the right eye, where cortical attention predominates in the left visual field and subcortical attention predominates in the temporal (right) visual field.

KW - motion induction

KW - parietal lobe

KW - superior colliculus

KW - visual attention

KW - visual pathways

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0031045649&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0031045649&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 9040469

AN - SCOPUS:0031045649

VL - 38

SP - 364

EP - 371

JO - Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science

JF - Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science

SN - 0146-0404

IS - 2

ER -