Cited by 536Visual perception and processing mechanismsFace Recognition and PerceptionVisual Attention and Saliency Detection

Neural Mechanisms of Object-Based Attention

Baldauf, Daniel, Desimone, Robert·2014·Science

Abstract

How we attend to objects and their features that cannot be separated by location is not understood. We presented two temporally and spatially overlapping streams of objects, faces versus houses, and used magnetoencephalography and functional magnetic resonance imaging to separate neuronal responses to attended and unattended objects. Attention to faces versus houses enhanced the sensory responses in the fusiform face area (FFA) and parahippocampal place area (PPA), respectively. The increases in sensory responses were accompanied by induced gamma synchrony between the inferior frontal junction, IFJ, and either FFA or PPA, depending on which object was attended. The IFJ appeared to be the driver of the synchrony, as gamma phases were advanced by 20 ms in IFJ compared to FFA or PPA. Thus, the IFJ may direct the flow of visual processing during object-based attention, at least in part through coupled oscillations with specialized areas such as FFA and PPA.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1126/science.1247003

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • An interplay between domain-general and domain-specific networks may result in the control of automatic imitative tendencies.

    “Thus, similar to other domains of social information processing, an interplay between domain-general and domain-specific networks may result in the control of automatic imitative tendencies (Baldauf & Desimone, 2014;Spunt & Adolphs, 2017;Zaki et al., 2010).”

    From The inhibition of automatic imitation: a meta-analysis and synthesis of fMRI studies (2018) · cites this paper as Baldauf & Desimone, 2014

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Baldauf, D., & Desimone, R.
Affiliations
McGovern Institute for Brain Research (US)
Corresponding author
Baldauf, Daniel
Venue
Science
Published
2014-04-25
Volume
344
Issue
6182
Pages
424-427
ISSN
  • 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-9203
OpenAlex
W2063803645
Cited by
536
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 33 · 2025: 59 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 46 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 67 · 2019: 52 · 2018: 42 · 2017: 57 · 2016: 33 · 2015: 28 · 2014: 8
FWCI
23.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Institutional Research Information System (Università degli Studi di Trento) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Fidelity Foundation
  • Autism Research Institute
  • Simons Foundation Autism Research Initiative
  • Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Mental Health
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse
  • National Eye Institute (P30EY002621, P30EY2621)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
Keywords
object-based attention, fusiform face area, parahippocampal place area, inferior frontal junction, gamma synchrony, neural oscillations, face perception, place perception
MeSH terms
Adult, Attention, Brain, Brain Mapping, Female, Frontal Lobe, Humans, Functional Laterality, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Temporal Lobe, Visual Cortex, Visual Perception, Magnetoencephalography, Young Adult, Diffusion Tensor Imaging

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