Cited by 63Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesVisual perception and processing mechanismsVisual Attention and Saliency Detection

Functional dissociation of the inferior frontal junction from the dorsal attention network in top-down attentional control

Open access
Tamber-Rosenau, Benjamin J., Asplund, Christopher L., Marois, René·2018·Journal of Neurophysiology

Abstract

The posterior lateral prefrontal cortex—specifically, the inferior frontal junction (IFJ)—is thought to exert a key role in the control of attention. However, the precise nature of that role remains elusive. During the voluntary deployment and maintenance of visuospatial attention, the IFJ is typically coactivated with a core dorsal network consisting of the frontal eye field and superior parietal cortex. During stimulus-driven attention, IFJ instead couples with a ventrolateral network, suggesting that IFJ plays a role in attention distinct from the dorsal network. Because IFJ rapidly switches activation patterns to accommodate conditions of goal-directed and stimulus-driven attention (Asplund CL, Todd JJ, Snyder AP, Marois R. Nat Neurosci 13: 507–512, 2010), we hypothesized that IFJ’s primary role is to dynamically reconfigure attention rather than to maintain attention under steady-state conditions. This hypothesis predicts that in a goal-directed visuospatial cuing paradigm IFJ would transiently deploy attention toward the cued location, whereas the dorsal attention network would maintain attentional weights during the delay between cue and target presentation. Here we tested this hypothesis with functional magnetic resonance imaging while subjects were engaged in a Posner cuing task with variable cue-target delays. Both IFJ and dorsal network regions were involved in transient processes, but sustained activity was far more evident in the dorsal network than in IFJ. These results support the account that IFJ primarily acts to shift attention whereas the dorsal network is the main locus for the maintenance of stable attentional states. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Goal-directed visuospatial attention is controlled by a dorsal fronto-parietal network and lateral prefrontal cortex. However, the relative roles of these regions in goal-directed attention are unknown. Here we present evidence for their dissociable roles in the transient reconfiguration and sustained maintenance of attentional settings: while maintenance of attentional settings is confined to the dorsal network, the configuration of these settings at the beginning of an attentional episode is a function of lateral prefrontal cortex.

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 · 10.1152/jn.00506.2018

Cites

119 of 119 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?

  • The functional connectivity pattern of the inferior frontal junction, which shows strong functional coupling with the frontoparietal network, shifts towards ventral regions during stimulus-driven attentional conditions.

    “In this regard, the functional connectivity pattern of the inferior frontal junction, which shows strong functional coupling with the frontoparietal network, shifts towards ventral regions during stimulus-driven attentional conditions (Tamber-Rosenau et al. 2018).”

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
Tamber-Rosenau, B. J., Asplund, C. L., & Marois, R.
Affiliations
  • Vanderbilt University (US)
  • Yale-NUS College (SG)
Corresponding author
Tamber-Rosenau, Benjamin J.
Venue
Journal of Neurophysiology
Published
2018-11-01
Volume
120
Issue
5
Pages
2498-2512
ISSN
  • 0022-3077 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-1598
OpenAlex
W2889550828
Cited by
63
References
119
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2016: 1
FWCI
1.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neurophysiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • HHS | NIH | National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) (R01-MH70776)
  • HHS | NIH | National Eye Institute (NEI) (5T32-EY007135, P30-EY008126)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
Keywords
inferior frontal junction, dorsal attention network, top-down attentional control, visuospatial attention, sustained attention, attentional shift, frontal eye field, superior parietal cortex, top-down attention, bottom-up attention, functional dissociation
MeSH terms
Adult, Attention, Brain Mapping, Cues, Female, Humans, Male, Parietal Lobe, Space Perception, Visual Perception, Prefrontal Cortex

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