Cited by 514Visual perception and processing mechanismsTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesTactile and Sensory Interactions

Concurrent TMS-fMRI and Psychophysics Reveal Frontal Influences on Human Retinotopic Visual Cortex

Open access
Ruff, Christian C., Blankenburg, Felix, Bjoertomt, Otto, Bestmann, Sven, Freeman, Elliot, Haynes, John-Dylan, Rees, Geraint, Josephs, Oliver +2 more·2006·Current Biology

Abstract

Background Regions in human frontal cortex may have modulatory top-down influences on retinotopic visual cortex, but to date neuroimaging methods have only been able to provide indirect evidence for such functional interactions between remote but interconnected brain regions. Here we combined transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) with concurrent functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), plus psychophysics, to show that stimulation of the right human frontal eye-field (FEF) produced a characteristic topographic pattern of activity changes in retinotopic visual areas V1-V4, with functional consequences for visual perception.Results FEF TMS led to activity increases for retinotopic representations of the peripheral visual field, but to activity decreases for the central field, in areas V1-V4. These frontal influences on visual cortex occurred in a top-down manner, independently of visual input. TMS of a control site (vertex) did not elicit such visual modulations, and saccades, blinks, or pupil dilation could not account for our results. Finally, the effects of FEF TMS on activity in retinotopic visual cortex led to a behavioral prediction that we confirmed psychophysically by showing that TMS of the frontal site (again compared with vertex) enhanced perceived contrast for peripheral relative to central visual stimuli.Conclusions Our results provide causal evidence that circuits originating in the human FEF can modulate activity in retinotopic visual cortex, in a manner that differentiates the central and peripheral visual field, with functional consequences for perception. More generally, our study illustrates how the new approach of concurrent TMS-fMRI can now reveal causal interactions between remote but interconnected areas of the human brain.

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.cub.2006.06.057

Cites

67 of 67 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?

  • Top-down influences are increasingly recognized as an integral component in early sensory processing.

    “Top‐down influences are increasingly recognized as an integral component in early sensory processing, 41 , 128 , 184 , 185 , 186 , 187 but the contention that these hierarchical dynamics represent prediction error minimization has rarely been explicitly tested.”

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
Ruff, C. C., Blankenburg, F., Bjoertomt, O., Bestmann, S., Freeman, E., Haynes, J.-D., Rees, G., Josephs, O., Deichmann, R., & Driver, J.
Affiliations
  • University College London (GB)
  • Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences (DE)
Corresponding author
Ruff, Christian C.
Venue
Current Biology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-08
Volume
16
Issue
15
Pages
1479-1488
ISSN
0960-9822 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2090909062
Cited by
514
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 39 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 32 · 2013: 32 · 2012: 45
FWCI
15.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion)
  • Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (submittedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Funders
  • Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
  • Wellcome Trust
  • Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
Keywords
frontal eye field, retinotopic visual cortex, top-down modulation, visual perception, peripheral visual field, central visual field, transcranial magnetic stimulation, primary visual cortex
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain Mapping, Frontal Lobe, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Psychophysics, Visual Cortex, Visual Perception, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

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