Cited by 96Visual perception and processing mechanismsTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesMultisensory perception and integration

Spatial attention changes excitability of human visual cortex to direct stimulation

Open access
Bestmann, Sven, Ruff, Christian C., Blakemore, Colin, Driver, Jon, Thilo, Kai V.·2007·Current Biology

Abstract

Conscious perception depends not only on sensory input, but also on attention [1, 2]. Recent studies in monkeys [3-6] and humans [7-12] suggest that influences of spatial attention on visual awareness may reflect top-down influences on excitability of visual cortex. Here we tested this specifically, by providing direct input into human visual cortex via cortical transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to produce illusory visual percepts, called phosphenes. We found that a lower TMS intensity was needed to elicit a conscious phosphene when its apparent spatial location was attended, rather than unattended. Our results indicate that spatial attention can enhance visual-cortex excitability, and visual awareness, even when sensory signals from the eye via the thalamic pathway are bypassed.

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.2006.11.063

Cites

39 of 39 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?

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
Bestmann, S., Ruff, C. C., Blakemore, C., Driver, J., & Thilo, K. V.
Affiliations
  • UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology (GB)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • Royal Holloway University of London (GB)
Corresponding author
Bestmann, Sven
Venue
Current Biology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-01
Volume
17
Issue
2
Pages
134-139
ISSN
0960-9822 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2054418046
Cited by
96
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 7
FWCI
5.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Funders
Wellcome Trust (066097)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Multisensory perception and integration
Keywords
spatial attention, visual cortex excitability, phosphenes, conscious perception, visual awareness, top-down attention, transcranial magnetic stimulation, direct cortical stimulation
MeSH terms
Adult, Attention, Female, Humans, Male, Phosphenes, Space Perception, Visual Cortex, 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