A visual salience map in the primate frontal eye field
Abstract
Models of attention and saccade target selection propose that within the brain there is a topographic map of visual salience that combines bottom-up and top-down influences to identify locations for further processing. The results of a series of experiments with monkeys performing visual search tasks have identified a population of frontal eye field (FEF) visually responsive neurons that exhibit all of the characteristics of a visual salience map. The activity of these FEF neurons is not sensitive to specific features of visual stimuli; but instead, their activity evolves over time to select the target of the search array. This selective activation reflects both the bottom-up intrinsic conspicuousness of the stimuli and the top-down knowledge and goals of the viewer. The peak response within FEF specifies the target for the overt gaze shift. However, the selective activity in FEF is not in itself a motor command because the magnitude of activation reflects the relative behavioral significance of the different stimuli in the visual scene and occurs even when no saccade is made. Identifying a visual salience map in FEF validates the theoretical concept of a salience map in many models of attention. In addition, it strengthens the emerging view that FEF is not only involved in producing overt gaze shifts, but is also important for directing covert spatial attention.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The attention network is presumably shared with the intraparietal region, frontal eye fields, and visual cortices, through direct connections from the cortex to the SC, and indirectly from the SC to the cortex via the pulvinar.
“This attention network is presumably shared with the intraparietal region [38], frontal eye fields [39], and visual cortices, through direct connections from the cortex to the SC, and indirectly from the SC to the cortex via the pulvinar [40].”
From Dawn simulation light impacts on different cognitive domains under sleep restriction (2015) · cites this paper as [39]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 50 · Cited by 431
- Authors
- Thompson, K. G., & Bichot, N. P.
- Affiliations
- National Institutes of Health (US)
- Corresponding author
- Thompson, Kirk G.
- Venue
- Progress in Brain Research
- Publisher
- Elsevier
- Published
- 2005
- Volume
- 147
- Pages
- 249-262
- ISSN
- 0079-6123 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1597752419
- Cited by
- 431
- References
- 50
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 36
- FWCI
- 19.25
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Progress in brain research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Keywords
- frontal eye field, saccade target selection, visual search, covert spatial attention, bottom-up salience, top-down attention, gaze shifts, neuronal activity, primate visual cortex
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Attention, Cognition, Primates, Saccades, Visual Fields, Visual Pathways
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