Cited by 378Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesVisual perception and processing mechanismsVisual Attention and Saliency Detection

The prefrontal cortex and the executive control of attention

Open access
Rossi, Andrew F., Pessoa, Luiz, Desimone, Robert, Ungerleider, Leslie G.·2009·Experimental Brain Research

Abstract

We review two studies aimed at understanding the role of prefrontal cortex (PFC) in the control of attention. The first study examined which attentional functions are critically dependent on PFC by removing PFC unilaterally and transecting the forebrain commissures in two macaques. The monkeys fixated a central cue and discriminated the orientation of a colored target grating presented among colored distracter gratings in either the hemifield affected by the PFC lesion or the normal control hemifield. When the cue was held constant for many trials, task performance in the affected hemifield was nearly normal. However, performance was severely impaired when the cue was switched frequently across trials. The monkeys were unimpaired in a pop-out task with changing targets that did not require top-down attentional control. Thus, the PFC lesion resulted in selective impairment in the monkeys' ability to switch top-down control. In the second study, we used fMRI to investigate the neural correlates of top-down control in humans performing tasks identical to those used in the monkey experiments. Several fronto-parietal and posterior visual areas showed enhanced activation when attention was switched, which was greater on color cueing (top-down) trials relative to pop-out trials. Taken together, our findings indicate that both frontal and parietal cortices are involved in generating top-down control signals for attentive switching, which may then be fed back to visual processing areas. The PFC in particular plays a critical role in the ability to switch attentional control on the basis of changing task demands.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00221-008-1642-z

Cites

66 of 66 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Neural mechanisms computing relevance depend on the frontal lobes, implicating dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, anterior cingulate cortex, and orbital frontal cortex.

    “Although the neural mechanisms computing relevance are very poorly understood, lesion studies in monkeys and rats suggests that they depend on the frontal lobes. The studies implicate the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, the anterior cingulate cortex and the orbital frontal cortex in this computation (sometimes referred to as a “credit assignment” computation) (Kolling et al., 2012; Rossi et al., 2”

    From Attention, learning, and the value of information (2012) · cites this paper as Rossi et al., 2009

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rossi, A. F., Pessoa, L., Desimone, R., & Ungerleider, L. G.
Affiliations
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • Indiana University Bloomington (US)
  • McGovern Institute for Brain Research (US)
Corresponding author
  • Rossi, Andrew F.
  • Pessoa, Luiz
  • Desimone, Robert
  • Ungerleider, Leslie G.
Venue
Experimental Brain Research
Published
2008-11-22
Volume
192
Issue
3
Pages
489-497
ISSN
  • 0014-4819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1106
OpenAlex
W2047331899
Cited by
378
References
65
Citations by year
2026: 29 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 37 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 13
FWCI
7.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Experimental Brain Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH071589, Z01MH002035)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
Keywords
prefrontal cortex, top-down attentional control, attentional shift, executive function, frontoparietal cortex, hemispheric lateralization, macaque, functional MRI
MeSH terms
Animals, Attention, Brain Mapping, Cognition, Corpus Callosum, Cues, Denervation, Feedback, Functional Laterality, Macaca, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Mental Processes, Neural Pathways, Neuropsychological Tests, Parietal Lobe, Photic Stimulation, Psychomotor Performance, Visual Cortex, Visual Perception, Volition, Prefrontal Cortex

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review