Spatial attention during saccade decisions

Attention biases the process of risky decision-making: Evidence from eye-tracking

Attention determines what kind of option information is processed during risky choices owing to the limitation of visual attention. This paper reviews research on the relationship between higher-complexity risky decision-making and attention as illustrated by eye-tracking to explain the process of risky decision-making by the effect of attention. We demonstrate this process from three stages: the pre-phase guidance of options on attention, the process of attention being biased, and the impact of attention on final risk preference. We conclude that exogenous information can capture attention directly to salient options, thereby altering evidence accumulation. In particular, for multi-attribute risky decision-making, attentional advantages increase the weight of specific attributes, thus biasing risk preference in different directions. We highlight the significance of understanding how people use available information to weigh risks from an information-processing perspective via process data.

Dissociable roles of human frontal eye fields and early visual cortex in presaccadic attention

Shortly before saccadic eye movements, visual sensitivity at the saccade target is enhanced, at the expense of sensitivity elsewhere. Some behavioral and neural correlates of this presaccadic shift of attention resemble those of covert attention, deployed during fixation. Microstimulation in non-human primates has shown that presaccadic attention modulates perception via feedback from oculomotor to visual areas. This mechanism also seems plausible in humans, as both oculomotor and visual areas are active during saccade planning. We investigated this hypothesis by applying TMS to frontal or visual areas during saccade preparation. By simultaneously measuring perceptual performance, we show their causal and differential roles in contralateral presaccadic attention effects: Whereas rFEF+ stimulation enhanced sensitivity opposite the saccade target throughout saccade preparation, V1/V2 stimulation reduced sensitivity at the saccade target only shortly before saccade onset. These findings are consistent with presaccadic attention modulating perception through cortico-cortical feedback and further dissociate presaccadic and covert attention.

Action space restructures visual working memory in prefrontal cortex

Visual working memory enables flexible behavior by decoupling sensory stimuli from behavioral actions. While previous studies have predominantly focused on the storage component of working memory, the role of future actions in shaping working memory remains unknown. To answer this question, we used two working memory tasks that allowed the dissociation of sensory and action components of working memory. We measured behavioral performance and neuronal activity in the macaque prefrontal cortex area, frontal eye fields. We show that the action space reshapes working memory, as evidenced by distinct patterns of memory tuning and attentional orienting between the two tasks. Notably, neuronal activity during the working memory period predicted future behavior and exhibited mixed selectivity in relation to the sensory space but linear selectivity relative to the action space. This linear selectivity was achieved through the rapid transformation from sensory to action space and was subsequently maintained as a stable cross-temporal population activity pattern. Combined, we provide direct physiological evidence of the action-oriented nature of frontal eye field neurons during memory tasks and demonstrate that the anticipation of behavioral outcomes plays a significant role in transforming and maintaining the contents of visual working memory.

The role of color in transsaccadic object correspondence

With each saccade, visual information is disrupted, and the visual system is tasked with establishing object correspondence between the presaccadic and postsaccadic representations of the saccade target. There is substantial evidence that the visual system consults spatiotemporal continuity when determining object correspondence across saccades. The evidence for surface feature continuity, however, is mixed. Surface features that are integral to the saccade target object's identity (e.g., shape and contrast polarity) are informative of object continuity, but features that may only imply the state of the object (e.g., orientation) are ignored. The present study tested whether color information is consulted to determine transsaccadic object continuity. We used two variations of the intrasaccadic target displacement task. In Experiments 1 and 2, participants reported the direction of the target displacement. In Experiments 3 and 4, they instead reported whether they detected any target movement. In all experiments, we manipulated the saccade target's continuity by removing it briefly (i.e., blanking) and by changing its color. We found that large color changes can disrupt stability and increase sensitivity to displacements for both direction and movement reports, although not as strongly as long blank durations (250 ms). Interestingly, even smaller color changes, but not blanking, reduced response biases. These results indicate that disrupting surface feature continuity may impact the process of transsaccadic object correspondence more strongly than spatiotemporal disruptions by both increasing the sensitivity and decreasing the response bias.

Dissociable roles of human frontal eye fields and early visual cortex in presaccadic attention - evidence from TMS

Shortly before each saccadic eye movement, presaccadic attention improves visual sensitivity at the saccade target 1-5 at the expense of lowered sensitivity at non-target locations 6-11 . Some behavioral and neural correlates of presaccadic attention and covert attention -which likewise enhances sensitivity, but during fixation 12 -are similar 13 . This resemblance has led to the debatable 13-18 notion that presaccadic and covert attention are functionally equivalent and rely on the same neural circuitry 19-21 . At a broad scale, oculomotor brain structures (e.g., FEF) are also modulated during covert attention 22-24 - yet by distinct neuronal subpopulations 25-28 . Perceptual benefits of presaccadic attention rely on feedback from oculomotor structures to visual cortices 29,30 ( Fig. 1a ); micro-stimulation of FEF in non-human primates affects activity in visual cortex 31-34 and enhances visual sensitivity at the movement field of the stimulated neurons 35-37 . Similar feedback projections seem to exist in humans: FEF+ activation precedes occipital activation during saccade preparation 38,39 and FEF TMS modulates activity in visual cortex 40-42 and enhances perceived contrast in the contralateral hemifield 40 . We investigated presaccadic feedback in humans by applying TMS to frontal or visual areas during saccade preparation. By simultaneously measuring perceptual performance, we show the causal and differential roles of these brain regions in contralateral presaccadic benefits at the saccade target and costs at non-targets: Whereas rFEF+ stimulation reduced presaccadic costs throughout saccade preparation, V1/V2 stimulation reduced benefits only shortly before saccade onset. These effects provide causal evidence that presaccadic attention modulates perception through cortico-cortical feedback and further dissociate presaccadic and covert attention.

Allocation of Visuospatial Attention Indexes Evidence Accumulation for Reach Decisions

Visuospatial attention is a prerequisite for the performance of visually guided movements: perceptual discrimination is regularly enhanced at target locations before movement initiation. It is known that this attentional prioritization evolves over the time of movement preparation; however, it is not clear whether this build-up simply reflects a time requirement of attention formation or whether, instead, attention build-up reflects the emergence of the movement decision. To address this question, we combined behavioral experiments, psychophysics, and computational decision-making models to characterize the time course of attention build-up during motor preparation. Participants (n = 46, 29 female) executed center-out reaches to one of two potential target locations and reported the identity of a visual discrimination target (DT) that occurred concurrently at one of various time-points during movement preparation and execution. Visual discrimination increased simultaneously at the two potential target locations but was modulated by the experiment-wide probability that a given location would become the final goal. Attention increased further for the location that was then designated as the final goal location, with a time course closely related to movement initiation. A sequential sampling model of decision-making faithfully predicted key temporal characteristics of attentional allocation. Together, these findings provide evidence that visuospatial attentional prioritization during motor preparation does not simply reflect that a spatial location has been selected as movement goal, but rather indexes the time-extended, cumulative decision that leads to the selection, hence constituting a link between perceptual and motor aspects of sensorimotor decisions.

Eye and hand movements disrupt attentional control

Voluntary attentional control is the ability to selectively focus on a subset of visual information in the presence of other competing stimuli–a marker of cognitive control enabling flexible, goal-driven behavior. To test its robustness, we contrasted attentional control with the most common source of attentional orienting in daily life: attention shifts prior to goal-directed eye and hand movements. In a multi-tasking paradigm, human participants attended at a location while planning eye or hand movements elsewhere. Voluntary attentional control suffered with every simultaneous action plan, even under reduced task difficulty and memory load–factors known to interfere with attentional control. Furthermore, the performance cost was limited to voluntary attention: We observed simultaneous attention benefits at two movement targets without attentional competition between them. This demonstrates that the visual system allows for the concurrent representation of multiple attentional foci. Since attentional control is extremely fragile and dominated by premotor attention shifts, we propose that action-driven selection plays the superordinate role for visual selection.

Contrasting attentional biases in a saccadic choice task

To gain insight into how human observers select items in the visual field we pitted two attentional biases against one another in a single free choice design. The first bias is the nasal-temporal asymmetry during free choice tasks, where observers tend to choose targets that appear in their temporal hemifield over targets appearing in their nasal hemifield. The second is the choice bias found in studies of attentional priming. When observers have to select between a stimulus that shares features with a preceding target and a stimulus sharing features with previous distractors, they have a strong tendency to choose the preceding search target and this bias increases the more often the same search is repeated. Our results show that both biases affect saccadic choice, but they also show that the nasal-temporal bias can modulate the strength of the priming effects, but not vice versa. The priming effect was stronger for stimuli appearing in the temporal than in the nasal hemifield, but the nasal-temporal bias was similar for primed and unprimed targets. Additionally, our findings are the first to show how search repetition leads to faster saccades. The observed difference between the effects of the NTA and priming biases may reflect the difference in neural mechanisms thought to be behind these biases and that biases at lower levels may outrank higher-level biases, at least in their effect on visual attention.

To look or not to look: dissociating presaccadic and covert spatial attention

Attention is a central neural process that enables selective and efficient processing of visual information. Individuals can attend to specific visual information either overtly, by making an eye movement to an object of interest, or covertly, without moving their eyes. We review behavioral, neuropsychological, neurophysiological, and computational evidence of presaccadic attentional modulations that occur while preparing saccadic eye movements, and highlight their differences from those of covert spatial endogenous (voluntary) and exogenous (involuntary) attention. We discuss recent studies and experimental procedures on how these different types of attention impact visual performance, alter appearance, differentially modulate the featural representation of basic visual dimensions (orientation and spatial frequency), engage different neural computations, and recruit partially distinct neural substrates. We conclude that presaccadic attention and covert attention are dissociable.

The peripheral sensitivity profile at the saccade target reshapes during saccade preparation

Goal-directed eye movements (saccades) bring peripheral objects of interest into high-acuity foveal vision. In preparation for the incoming foveal image, the perception of the saccade target may sharpen gradually before the eye movement is executed. Indeed, previous studies suggest that pre-saccadic attention shifts enhance sensitivity to high spatial frequencies (SFs) more than sensitivity to lower SFs. This pattern, however, was observed within a narrow frequency range and may reflect local changes in the shape of a broader underlying sensitivity profile. Depending on the development of the profile's shape, SFs above the previously examined range may profit less from saccade preparation. To assess the impact of saccade preparation on the shape of a broader sensitivity profile, we prompted observers to discriminate the orientation of a sinusoidal grating (the probe) presented briefly at the target of an impending saccade, at 10 dva (degree of visual angle) eccentricity. The probe's SF ranged from 1 to 5.5 cycles per dva (cpd) and was unpredictable on a given trial. We fitted observers' response accuracies across SFs with a log-parabolic, that is, inverted U-shaped function. Long before saccade onset, the profile peaked at .6 cpd and dropped off towards lower and higher SFs with broad bandwidth. During saccade preparation, the peak of the profile increased and shifted towards higher SFs while the bandwidth of the profile decreased. As a consequence of this reshaping process, pre-saccadic enhancement increased with SF up to 2.5 cpd, corroborating previous findings. Sensitivities to higher SFs, however, profited less from saccade preparation. We conclude that the extent of pre-saccadic enhancement to a particular SF is governed by its position on a broader sensitivity profile which reshapes substantially during saccade preparation. The shift of the profile's peak towards higher SFs increases resolution at the saccade target even when the features of relevant visual information are unpredictable.

The spatial and temporal properties of attentional selectivity for saccades and reaches

The preparation and execution of saccades and goal-directed movements elicits an accompanying shift in attention at the locus of the impending movement. However, some key aspects of the spatiotemporal profile of this attentional shift between eye and hand movements are not resolved. While there is evidence that attention is improved at the target location when making a reach, it is not clear how attention shifts over space and time around the movement target as a saccade and a reach are made to that target. Determining this spread of attention is an important aspect in understanding how attentional resources are used in relation to movement planning and guidance in real world tasks. We compared performance on a perceptual discrimination paradigm during a saccade-alone task, reach-alone task, and a saccade-plus-reach task to map the temporal profile of the premotor attentional shift at the goal of the movement and at three surrounding locations. We measured performance relative to a valid baseline level to determine whether motor planning induces additional attentional facilitation compared to mere covert attention. Sensitivity increased relative to movement onset at the target and at the surrounding locations, for both the saccade-alone and saccade-plus-reach conditions. The results suggest that the temporal profile of the attentional shift is similar for the two tasks involving saccades (saccade-alone and saccade-plus-reach tasks), but is very different when the influence of the saccade is removed. In this case, performance in the saccade-plus-reach task reflects the lower sensitivity observed when a reach-alone task is being conducted. In addition, the spatial profile of this spread of attention is not symmetrical around the target. This suggests that when a saccade and reach are being planned together, the saccade drives the attentional shift, and the reach-alone carries little attentional weight.

The spread of presaccadic attention depends on the spatial configuration of the visual scene

When preparing a saccade, attentional resources are focused at the saccade target and its immediate vicinity. Here we show that this does not hold true when saccades are prepared toward a recently extinguished target. We obtained detailed maps of orientation sensitivity when participants prepared a saccade toward a target that either remained on the screen or disappeared before the eyes moved. We found that attention was mainly focused on the immediate surround of the visible target and spread to more peripheral locations as a function of the distance from the cue and the delay between the target's disappearance and the saccade. Interestingly, this spread was not accompanied with a spread of the saccade endpoint. These results suggest that presaccadic attention and saccade programming are two distinct processes that can be dissociated as a function of their interaction with the spatial configuration of the visual scene.

The interdependence of attention, working memory and gaze control: behavior and neural circuitry

Visual attention, visual working memory, and gaze control are basic functions that all select a subset of visual input to guide immediate or subsequent behavior. In this review, we focus on the relationship between these three functions and describe evidence, both at the behavioral and neural circuit levels that they are heavily interdependent. We start with the demonstration that gaze control - or saccade preparation in particular - leads to spatial attention. Next, we show that spatial attention and working memory interact at the behavioral level and rely on a common set of neural mechanisms. Next, we discuss the evidence that gaze control mechanisms are involved in spatial working memory. Lastly, we highlight the links between gaze control and non-spatial memory.

Saccade selection and inhibition: motor and attentional components

Motor responses are fundamentally spatial in their function and neural organization. However, studies of inhibitory motor control, focused on global stopping of all actions, have ignored whether inhibitory control can be exercised selectively for specific actions. We used a new approach to elicit and measure motor inhibition by asking human participants to either look at (select) or avoid looking at (inhibit) a location in space. We found that instructing a location to be avoided resulted in an inhibitory bias specific to that location. When compared with the facilitatory bias observed in the Look task, it differed significantly in both its spatiotemporal dynamics and its modulation of attentional processing. While action selection was evident in oculomotor system and interacted with attentional processing, action inhibition was evident mainly in the oculomotor system. Our findings suggest that action inhibition is implemented by spatially specific mechanisms that are separate from action selection. NEW & NOTEWORTHY We show that cognitive control of saccadic responses evokes separable action selection and inhibition processes. Both action selection and inhibition are represented in the saccadic system, but only action selection interacts with the attentional system.

Pre-saccadic remapping relies on dynamics of spatial attention

Each saccade shifts the projections of the visual scene on the retina. It has been proposed that the receptive fields of neurons in oculomotor areas are predictively remapped to account for these shifts. While remapping of the whole visual scene seems prohibitively complex, selection by attention may limit these processes to a subset of attended locations. Because attentional selection consumes time, remapping of attended locations should evolve in time, too. In our study, we cued a spatial location by presenting an attention-capturing cue at different times before a saccade and constructed maps of attentional allocation across the visual field. We observed no remapping of attention when the cue appeared shortly before saccade. In contrast, when the cue appeared sufficiently early before saccade, attentional resources were reallocated precisely to the remapped location. Our results show that pre-saccadic remapping takes time to develop suggesting that it relies on the spatial and temporal dynamics of spatial attention.