Cited by 30Visual perception and processing mechanismsNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesVisual Attention and Saliency Detection

Both dorsal and ventral attention network nodes are implicated in exogenously driven visuospatial anticipation

Open access
Ahrens, Merle-Marie, Veniero, Domenica, Freund, Inga Marie, Harvey, Monika, Thut, Gregor·2019·Cortex

Abstract

Neuroimaging and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) studies have implicated a dorsal fronto-parietal network in endogenous attention control and a more ventral set of areas in exogenous attention shifts. However, the extent and circumstances under which these cortical networks overlap and/or interact remain unclear. Crucially, whereas previous studies employed experimental designs that tend to confound exogenous with endogenous attentional engagement, we used a cued target discrimination paradigm that behaviourally dissociates exogenous from endogenous attention processes. Participants engaged with endogenous attention cues, while simultaneous apparent motion cues were driving exogenous attention along the motion path towards or away from the target position. To interfere with dorsal or ventral attention networks, we delivered neuronavigated double-pulse TMS over either right intraparietal sulcus (rIPS) or right temporo-parietal junction (rTPJ) towards the end of the cue target interval, and compared the effects to a sham-TMS condition. For sham-TMS, endogenous and exogenous cueing both benefitted discrimination accuracy. Target discrimination was enhanced at validly versus invalidly cued locations (endogenous cueing benefit) as well as when targets appeared in versus out of the motion path (exogenous cueing benefit), despite motion being uninformative and task-irrelevant, replicating previous findings. Interestingly, both rIPS- and rTPJ-TMS abolished attention benefits from exogenous cueing, while endogenous cueing benefits were unaffected. Our findings provide evidence against independent involvement of the dorsal and ventral attention network nodes in exogenous attention processes.

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 · 10.1016/j.cortex.2019.02.031

Cites

83 of 85 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?

  • Distinctions between dorsal/ventral attention networks and central executive/cingulo-opercular networks remain unclear and inconsistent, with counter-evidence to distinct attention networks for bottom-up and top-down processing.

    “These distinctions, however, remain unclear and inconsistent, with more recent studies providing counter-evidence to this dogma of distinct attention networks for bottom-up and top–down processing85.”

    From Paying attention to attention in depression (2019) · cites this paper as [85]

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

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Dugué, L., Philippe, M., & VanRullen, R. (2015). Theta Oscillations Modulate Attentional Search Performance Periodically. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience , 27 (5), 945-958. http://doi.org/10.1162/jocn · DOI
  2. Kincade, J. M., Abrams, R. A., Astafiev, S. V, Shulman, G. L., & Corbetta, M. (2005). An event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging study of voluntary and stimulusdriven orienting of attention. The Journal of Neuroscience : The Official Journal of the Society for Neuroscience , 25 (18), 4593-4604. http://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0236-05.2005 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Pinto, Y., van der Leij, A. R., Sligte, I. G., Lamme, V. A. F., & Scholte, H. S. (2013). Bottomup and top-down attention are independent. Journal of Vision , 13 (3), 1-14. http://doi.org/10.1167/13.3.16.doi · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ahrens, M.-M., Veniero, D., Freund, I. M., Harvey, M., & Thut, G.
Affiliations
University of Glasgow (GB)
Corresponding author
  • Ahrens, Merle-Marie
  • Thut, Gregor
Venue
Cortex
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-08
Volume
117
Pages
168-181
ISSN
0010-9452 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2921597459
Cited by
30
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2
FWCI
1.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cortex (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (publishedVersion)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
University of Glasgow
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
Keywords
bottom-up attention, top-down attention, dorsal attention network, ventral attention network, intraparietal sulcus, temporoparietal junction, attentional cueing, target discrimination, transcranial magnetic stimulation, neuronavigation
MeSH terms
Adult, Attention, Brain, Brain Mapping, Cues, Female, Humans, Male, Nerve Net, Neural Pathways, Photic Stimulation, Reaction Time, Space Perception, Visual Perception, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, Young Adult, Anticipation, Psychological

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