Sustained division of spatial attention to multiple locations within one hemifield

Neuroscience Letters

Volumn 414, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 65-70

  Malinowski, Peter ^a   Fuchs, Sandra ^b   Müller, Matthias M ^b  

^a LIVERPOOL JOHN MOORES UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEIPZIG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Attention models; Divided spatial attention; Human brain; Steady state visual evoked potentials; Visual hemisphere

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; BEHAVIOR; ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY; EVOKED VISUAL RESPONSE; FEMALE; HEMISPHERE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STEADY STATE; VISUAL FIELD; VISUAL STIMULATION;

ADULT; ATTENTION; BRAIN; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED POTENTIALS, VISUAL; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; HUMANS; MALE; MODELS, NEUROLOGICAL; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS; ORIENTATION; PHOTIC STIMULATION; REACTION TIME; SPACE PERCEPTION; TIME FACTORS; VISUAL FIELDS; VISUAL PATHWAYS;

EID: 33846895385     PISSN: 03043940     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.neulet.2006.12.001     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Awh E., and Pashler H. Evidence for split attentional foci. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 26 (2000) 834-846
2. Belger A., and Banich M.T. Costs and benefits of integrating information between the cerebral hemispheres: a computational perspective. Neuropsychology 12 (1998) 380-398
3. Carrasco M., Talgar C.P., and Cameron E.L. Characterizing visual performance fields: effects of transient covert attention, spatial frequency, eccentricity, task and set size. Spat. Vis. 15 (2001) 61-75
4. Castiello U., and Umilta C. Splitting focal attention. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 18 (1992) 837-848
5. F. Di Russo, S. Pitzalis, T. Aprile, G. Spitoni, F. Patria, A. Stella, D. Spinelli, S.A. Hillyard, Spatiotemporal analysis of the cortical sources of the steady-state visual evoked potential. Hum. Brain Mapp. (2006) [e-publication ahead of print, 15 June 2006].
6. Eltiti S., Wallace D., and Fox E. Selective target processing: perceptual load or distractor salience?. Percept. Psychophys. 67 5 (2005) 876-885
7. Hahn S., and Kramer J.H. Further evidence for the division of attention among non-contiguous locations. Vis. Cogn. 5 (1998) 217-256
8. Hillyard S.A., Hinrichs H., Tempelmann C., Morgan S.T., Hansen J.C., Scheich H., and Heinze H.J. Combining steady-state visual evoked potentials and fMRI to localize brain activity during selective attention. Hum. Brain. Mapp. 5 (1997) 287-292
9. Kraft A., Müller N.G., Hagendorf H., Schira M.M., Dick S., Fendrich R.M., and Brandt S.A. Interactions between task difficulty and hemispheric distribution of attended locations: implications for the splitting attention debate. Cogn. Brain Res. 24 (2005) 19-32
10. Liederman J. The dynamics of interhemispheric collaboration and hemispheric control. Brain Cogn. 36 (1998) 193-208
11. Luck S.J., Hillyard S.A., Mangun G.R., and Gazzaniga M.S. Independent hemispheric attentional systems mediate visual search in split-brain patients. Nature 342 (1989) 543-545
12. Maertens M., and Pollmann S. Interhemispheric resource sharing: decreasing benefits with increasing processing efficiency. Brain Cogn. 58 (2005) 183-192
13. McMains S.A., and Somers D.C. Processing efficiency of divided spatial attention mechanisms in human visual cortex. J. Neurosci. 25 (2005) 9444-9448
14. Morgan S.T., Hansen J.C., and Hillyard S.A. Selective attention to stimulus location modulates the steady-state visual evoked potential. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 93 (1996) 4770-4774
15. Müller M.M., Malinowski P., Gruber T., and Hillyard S.A. Sustained division of the attentional spotlight. Nature 424 (2003) 309-312
16. Müller M.M., Rockstroh B., Berg P., Wagner M., Elbert T., and Makeig S. SSR-modulation during slow cortical potentials. In: Pantev C. (Ed). Oscillatory event-related brain dynamics (1994), Plenum Press, New York 325-342
17. Müller M.M., Teder-Sälejärvi W.A., and Hillyard S.A. The time course of cortical facilitation during cued shifts of spatial attention. Nat. Neurosci. 1 (1998) 631-634
18. Müller M.M., Teder W., and Hillyard S.A. Magnetoencephalographic recording of steady-state visual evoked cortical activity. Brain Topogr. 9 (1997) 163-168
19. Pollmann S., Zaidel E., and von Cramon D.Y. The neural basis of the bilateral distribution advantage. Exp. Brain Res. 153 (2003) 322-333
20. Previc F.H. Functional specialization in the lower and upper visual fields in humans: its ecological origins and neurophysiological implications. Behav. Brain Sci. 13 (1990) 519-541
21. Regan D. Human brain electrophysiology: Evoked potentials and evoked magnetic fields in science and medicine (1989), Elsevier
22. Rijsdijk J.P., Kroon J.N., and van der Wildt G.J. Contrast sensitivity as a function of position on the retina. Vision Res. 20 (1980) 235-241
23. Sereno A.B., and Kosslyn S.M. Discrimination within and between hemifields: a new constraint on theories of attention. Neuropsychologia 29 (1991) 659-675
24. Weissman D.H., and Banich M.T. The cerebral hemispheres cooperate to perform complex but not simple tasks. Neuropsychology 14 (2000) 41-59