Cited by 116Visual perception and processing mechanismsNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesVisual Attention and Saliency Detection

Functional evolution of new and expanded attention networks in humans

Open access
Patel, Gaurav H., Yang, Danica, Jamerson, Emery C., Snyder, Lawrence H., Corbetta, Maurizio, Ferrera, Vincent P.·2015·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Significance: Macaque monkeys are often used as a model for the biological basis of human cognition. However, the two species last shared a common ancestor 25 million years ago, and in the intervening time the brain areas underlying cognition have likely evolved along different paths. We examined the similarities and differences of human and macaque brain areas underlying attention, a core cognitive ability, by recording brain activity while subjects of both species performed the same attention-demanding task. We found fundamental differences in the attention-related brain areas in the two species, including the complete absence, in monkeys, of a ventral-attention network present in humans. These results shed light on the evolution of the unique properties of the human brain.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.1420395112

Cites

66 of 66 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Monkey homologues of the human ventral (exogenous) attention network have not yet been established.

    “Monkey homologues of the human ventral (exogenous) attention network have not yet been established [42].”

    From Linking ADHD to the Neural Circuitry of Attention (2017) · cites this paper as [42]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Patel, G. H., Yang, D., Jamerson, E. C., Snyder, L. H., Corbetta, M., & Ferrera, V. P.
Affiliations
  • Columbia University Irving Medical Center (US)
  • SUNY College of Optometry (US)
  • Columbia University (US)
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2015-07-13
Volume
112
Issue
30
Pages
9454-9459
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W1885296009
Cited by
116
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 12
FWCI
7.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Padua Research Archive (University of Padova) (submittedVersion)
  • Padua Research Archive (University of Padova) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • HHS | NIH | National Institute of Mental Health (MH086466-04, MH018870-25, MH102471, MH096482)
  • HHS | NIH | National Eye Institute (EY012135)
  • American Psychiatric Foundation (none)
  • Leon Levy Foundation (none)
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
attentional networks, dorsal attention network, ventral attention network, human-macaque comparison, functional homology, visual search, temporoparietal junction, primate cognition
MeSH terms
Adult, Animals, Attention, Behavior, Animal, Brain, Brain Mapping, Cerebral Cortex, Cognition, Female, Humans, Macaca, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Nerve Net, Parietal Lobe, Reaction Time, Species Specificity, Young Adult

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