Attentional orienting and awareness: Evidence from a discrimination task

The cost of attentional reorienting on conscious visual perception: an MEG study

How do attentional networks influence conscious perception? To answer this question, we used magnetoencephalography in human participants and assessed the effects of spatially nonpredictive or predictive supra-threshold peripheral cues on the conscious perception of near-threshold Gabors. Three main results emerged. (i) As compared with invalid cues, both nonpredictive and predictive valid cues increased conscious detection. Yet, only predictive cues shifted the response criterion toward a more liberal decision (i.e. willingness to report the presence of a target under conditions of greater perceptual uncertainty) and affected target contrast leading to 50% detections. (ii) Conscious perception following valid predictive cues was associated to enhanced activity in frontoparietal networks. These responses were lateralized to the left hemisphere during attentional orienting and to the right hemisphere during target processing. The involvement of frontoparietal networks occurred earlier in valid than in invalid trials, a possible neural marker of the cost of re-orienting attention. (iii) When detected targets were preceded by invalid predictive cues, and thus reorienting to the target was required, neural responses occurred in left hemisphere temporo-occipital regions during attentional orienting, and in right hemisphere anterior insular and temporo-occipital regions during target processing. These results confirm and specify the role of frontoparietal networks in modulating conscious processing and detail how invalid orienting of spatial attention disrupts conscious processing.

Inhibitory and Facilitatory Cueing Effects: Competition between Exogenous and Endogenous Mechanisms

Inhibition of return is characterized by delayed responses to previously attended locations when the cue-target onset asynchrony (CTOA) is long enough. However, when cues are predictive of a target’s location, faster reaction times to cued as compared to uncued targets are normally observed. In this series of experiments investigating saccadic reaction times, we manipulated the cue predictability to 25% (counterpredictive), 50% (nonpredictive), and 75% (predictive) to investigate the interaction between predictive endogenous facilitatory (FCEs) and inhibitory cueing effects (ICEs). Overall, larger ICEs were seen in the counterpredictive condition than in the nonpredictive condition, and no ICE was found in the predictive condition. Based on the hypothesized additivity of FCEs and ICEs, we reasoned that the null ICEs observed in the predictive condition are the result of two opposing mechanisms balancing each other out, and the large ICEs observed with counterpredictive cueing can be attributed to the combination of endogenous facilitation at uncued locations with inhibition at cued locations. Our findings suggest that the endogenous activity contributed by cue predictability can reduce the overall inhibition observed when the mechanisms occur at the same location, or enhance behavioral inhibition when the mechanisms occur at opposite locations.

Orienting of attention with and without cue awareness

Many cognitive processes operate without consciousness, and exogenous attentional capture seems to be one of them. While endogenously attending to the opposite location of a cue cannot occur without cue awareness, attending the cued location in an exogenous or stimulus driven form can occur even when participants are not aware of the presence of the cue (McCormick, 1997). Orienting attention to a specific location shortens reaction times to supra-threshold stimuli, and increases the likelihood of consciously perceiving near-threshold stimuli in that location. Effects of unconscious cues have mostly been demonstrated in reaction times to supra-threshold targets. In some studies, unconscious cues were perceptually less salient than conscious cues, which introduced a confound between cue awareness and cue saliency. In the present study, we used near-threshold cues and targets, which were titrated to be consciously perceived in ~50% of the trials, therefore eliminating the cue saliency confound. Moreover, we explored for the first time the effects of cue awareness on the conscious perception of subsequently presented near-threshold targets. Our results demonstrate that when cues and targets did not spatially overlap, conscious cues enhanced target localization when they appeared near the target location. In contrast, non-consciously perceived cues impaired target localization when they appeared near the target location, producing a cost in detecting subsequently presented near-threshold targets. This indicates that attentional orienting by unconscious cues cannot be accounted for by the idea that attention modulates perceptual representations, boosting them nearer to the conscious threshold. Rather, the effect of unconscious cues on target localization is qualitatively different to that elicited by conscious cues.

Cue-target contingencies modulate voluntary orienting of spatial attention: dissociable effects for speed and accuracy

Voluntary orienting of spatial attention is typically investigated by visually presented directional cues, which are called predictive when they indicate where the target is more likely to appear. In this study, we investigated the nature of the potential link between cue predictivity (the proportion of valid trials) and the strength of the resulting covert orienting of attention. Participants judged the orientation of a unilateral Gabor grating preceded by a centrally presented, non-directional, color cue, arbitrarily prompting a leftwards or rightwards shift of attention. Unknown to them, cue predictivity was manipulated across blocks, whereby the cue was only predictive for either the first or the second half of the experiment. Our results show that the cueing effects were strongly influenced by the change in predictivity. This influence differently emerged in response speed and accuracy. The speed difference between valid and invalid trials was significantly larger when cues were predictive, and the amplitude of this effect was modulated at the single trial level by the recent trial history. Complementary to these findings, accuracy revealed a robust effect of block history and also a different time-course compared with speed, as if it mainly mirrored voluntary processes. These findings, obtained with a new manipulation and using arbitrary non-directional cueing, demonstrate that cue-target contingencies strongly modulate the way attention is deployed in space.

Resolving the controversy of the proportion validity effect: Volitional attention is not required, but may have an effect

Response time (RT) is facilitated when a target appears at a cued (valid) location versus an uncued (invalid) location. Interestingly, this valid-versus-invalid RT difference increases as the percentage of valid trials increases. In the present study, we investigated the mechanism responsible for this proportion valid cueing effect (PVE). The PVE is thought to reflect changes in voluntary attentional allocation, with greater attention being committed endogenously to the cued location as the percentage of valid trials increases. However, recent research has suggested that the PVE may reflect a form of implicit learning between the cue and the target location that is developed outside of awareness, and that this determines how attention is allocated. This lack of convergence may be due to methodological differences in how voluntary processing has been inferred. To test this issue, we generated a method that would allow the measurement of different degrees of volitional attention. In addition, we manipulated whether participants were instructed to attend to the cue-target relationship and determined whether this explicit engagement of attention influenced the PVE. We found that for both peripheral and central cues, volitional control is not required for a PVE; however, volitional control can modulate a PVE that is produced by central cues. Thus, a PVE is not a reliable indicator of volitional control, but its sensitivity to volitional control varies across cues. The present data shed light on the mechanism subserving the PVE and lend support to the theory that different cues engage, to some degree, qualitatively different forms of visuospatial attention.

Implicit learning: A way to improve visual search in spatial neglect?

Studies have shown that neglect patients are able to use stimulus regularities to orient faster toward the neglected side, without necessarily being aware of that information, or at the very least without being able to verbalize their knowledge. In order to better control for the involvement of explicit processes, the present study sought to test neglect patients' ability to detect more complex associations between stimuli using tasks similar to those used in implicit learning studies. Our results demonstrate that neglect patients had difficulties implicitly learning complex associations, contrary to what we found with controls. The possible influence of attentional and working memory impairments are discussed.

Can the exploration of left space be induced implicitly in unilateral neglect?

The purpose of the present study was to explore the ability of neglect patients to detect and exploit the predictive value of a cue to respond more quickly and accurately to targets on their contralesional side in a Posner spatial cueing task. The majority of the cues (i.e. 80%) were invalid, indicating that the target would appear on the opposite side, although patients were not informed of this bias. Our results demonstrate that some neglect patients were able to extract the cue's predictability and use it to orient faster toward the left. This cueing effect was present even in patients who were subsequently unable to describe the predictive character of the cues, and thus was not modulated by reportable awareness of the cue-target relation.

Two cognitive and neural systems for endogenous and exogenous spatial attention

Orienting of spatial attention is a family of phylogenetically old mechanisms developed to select information for further processing. Information can be selected via top-down or endogenous mechanisms, depending on the goals of the observers or on the task at hand. Moreover, salient and potentially dangerous events also attract spatial attention via bottom-up or exogenous mechanisms, allowing a rapid and efficient reaction to unexpected but important events. Fronto-parietal brain networks have been demonstrated to play an important role in supporting spatial attentional orienting, although there is no consensus on whether there is a single attentional system supporting both endogenous and exogenous attention, or two anatomical and functionally different attentional systems. In the present paper we review behavioral evidence emphasizing the differential characteristics of both systems, as well as their possible interactions for the control of the final orienting response. Behavioral studies reporting qualitative differences between the effects of both systems as well as double dissociations of the effects of endogenous and exogenous attention on information processing, suggest that they constitute two independent attentional systems, rather than a single one. Recent models of attentional orienting in humans have put forward the hypothesis of a dorsal fronto-parietal network for orienting spatial attention, and a more ventral fronto-parietal network for detecting unexpected but behaviorally relevant events. Non-invasive neurostimulation techniques, as well as neuropsychological data, suggest that endogenous and exogenous attention are implemented in overlapping, although partially segregated, brain circuits. Although more research is needed in order to refine our anatomical and functional knowledge of the brain circuits underlying spatial attention, we conclude that endogenous and exogenous spatial orienting constitute two independent attentional systems, with different behavioral effects, and partially distinct neural substrates.