Cited by 1,043Visual perception and processing mechanismsVisual Attention and Saliency DetectionNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Attention, intention, and priority in the parietal lobe

Open access
Bisley, James W., Goldberg, Michael E.·2010·Annual Review of Neuroscience

Abstract

For many years there has been a debate about the role of the parietal lobe in the generation of behavior. Does it generate movement plans (intention) or choose objects in the environment for further processing? To answer this, we focus on the lateral intraparietal area (LIP), an area that has been shown to play independent roles in target selection for saccades and the generation of visual attention. Based on results from a variety of tasks, we propose that LIP acts as a priority map in which objects are represented by activity proportional to their behavioral priority. We present evidence to show that the priority map combines bottom-up inputs like a rapid visual response with an array of top-down signals like a saccade plan. The spatial location representing the peak of the map is used by the oculomotor system to target saccades and by the visual system to guide visual attention.

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 · 10.1146/annurev-neuro-060909-152823

Cites

95 of 95 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?

  • Competition for neural representation is a dominant attribute along the entire hierarchy of visual cortex, which might explain why many different areas have been suggested to constitute a priority map.

    “The notion that competition for neural representation is a dominant attribute along the entire hierarchy of the visual cortex might also explain why many different areas have been suggested to constitute a priority map (e.g., Balan & Gottlieb, 2006; Bisley & Goldberg, 2010; Li, 2002; Mazer & Gallant, 2003).”

    From Selection history: How reward modulates selectivity of visual attention. (2018) · cites this paper as Bisley & Goldberg, 2010

    In “The Priority Map,” the paper describes winner-take-all selection and proposes that LIP represents a priority map. In “The Priority Map Incorporates Top-Down Feedback,” it notes that V1 and V4 have been suggested as salience maps, but distinguishes these from a true priority map. It does not establish that competition for neural representation dominates the entire visual-cortex hierarchy or offer that as the explanation for multiple proposed priority maps; page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Reward-related activity has been observed in areas consistently associated with the attentional network and believed to represent a form of priority map, most notably area LIP/IPS, frontal eye field (FEF), and the SC.

    “reward-related activity has been observed in areas consistently associated with the attentional network and believed to represent a form of priority map (e.g., Balan & Gottlieb, 2006; Bisley & Goldberg, 2010; Corbetta & Shulman, 2002; Gottlieb, Kusunoki, & Goldberg, 1998; Li, 2002; Mazer & Gallant, 2003), most notably area LIP/IPS, frontal eye field (FEF), and the SC”

    From Selection history: How reward modulates selectivity of visual attention. (2018) · cites this paper as Bisley & Goldberg, 2010

    The Priority Map and Priority Map Incorporates Top-Down Feedback sections describe LIP as a proposed priority map that guides attention and report reward-related modulation of LIP activity. The copy mentions FEF and the superior colliculus in connection with eye movements, but does not establish reward-related priority-map activity in those areas or explicitly extend the LIP account to IPS. Page numbers were not available in the indexed passages. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • 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].”

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
Bisley, J. W., & Goldberg, M. E.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • New York State Psychiatric Institute (US)
Venue
Annual Review of Neuroscience
Published
2010-06-01
Volume
33
Issue
1
Pages
1-21
ISSN
  • 0147-006X (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-4126
OpenAlex
W2114876288
Cited by
1,043
References
95
Citations by year
2026: 46 · 2025: 58 · 2024: 46 · 2023: 54 · 2022: 84 · 2021: 62 · 2020: 67 · 2019: 69 · 2018: 64 · 2017: 65 · 2016: 72 · 2015: 73 · 2014: 82 · 2013: 61 · 2012: 78
FWCI
4.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Annual Review of Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r24ey015634-05)
  • National Eye Institute (R24 EY-015634, R01EY017039, R21EY020631, R01EY019273, R01EY014978, R21EY017938)
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
parietal lobe, lateral intraparietal area, priority map, visual attention, saccades, target selection, intention, top-down control, oculomotor system, object representation
MeSH terms
Animals, Attention, Humans, Orientation, Parietal Lobe, Psychomotor Performance, Saccades, Space Perception

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