1 / 1

Design: Cue (gaze, square) x SOA (short, long) x cue Validity (valid, invalid)

SFN 2008 Poster # 86.12/RR56. The Neural Basis of Socially-Driven Spatial Orienting of Attention Deanna J. Greene, Eric Mooshagian, Jonas T. Kaplan, Eran Zaidel, & Marco Iacoboni University of California Los Angeles. Introduction Is social orienting special?

stella
Download Presentation

Design: Cue (gaze, square) x SOA (short, long) x cue Validity (valid, invalid)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. SFN 2008 Poster # 86.12/RR56 The Neural Basis of Socially-Driven Spatial Orienting of Attention Deanna J. Greene, Eric Mooshagian, Jonas T. Kaplan, Eran Zaidel, & Marco Iacoboni University of California Los Angeles • Introduction • Is social orienting special? • Directional social cues (eye gaze) cause automatic shifts of attention following the direction of the gaze (Driver et al., 1999; Friesen & Kingstone, 1998). • Gaze cues yield an early facilitation effect even when they are not predictive of an impending target, just like traditional automatic (peripheral) cues. • However, gaze cues rarely yield the late inhibitory effect (inhibition of return: IOR) that is normally generated by peripheral cues (McKee et al., 2007; but see Frischen et al. 2007). • It has been suggested that social orienting relies on a separate neural system from nonsocial orienting. Yet, past imaging studies have only compared gaze cues to symbolic cues, rather than purely automatic cues (Hietanen et al., 2006; Tipper et al., 2008). • In the present study, we used fMRI to compare the neural system underlying social orienting to that underlying automatic nonsocial orienting. We included both short and long cue-to-target stimulus onset asynchronies (SOA) in order to examine both the early and late components of automatic cueing. Results Reaction Times: • Square cues- facilitation (faster responses to validly cued than invalidly cued targets) at the short SOA, and IOR (slower responses to validly cued than invalidly cued targets) at the long SOA. • Gaze cues- facilitation at the short SOA, and no significant effect at the long SOA. p = .06 * * Imaging: Gaze > Rest & Square > Rest: overlapping activations in frontal eye fields (FEF), supplementary eye fields (SEF), posterior parietal cortex (parietal eye fields: PEF), and inferior temporal and lateral occipital regions Gaze > Square: Lateral occipital cortex, fusiform gyrus, temporal occipital fusiform (similar in short and long SOA conditions) Square > Gaze (only for long SOA): right cerebellar hemisphere, cerebellar vermis, medulla Methods(N = 20) Spatial Cueing Paradigm:Target localization task (is the ‘X’ on the left or right?) Cue- non-predictive warning stimulus (gaze or square on for 125ms) precedes target SOA: 150 or 950 msec Design:Cue (gaze, square) x SOA (short, long) x cue Validity (valid, invalid) fMRI data acquisition: Siemens Allegra 3T scanner Event-related design, 4 functional runs, 72 trials each • Conclusions • Social and nonsocial orienting recruited overlapping fronto-parietal areas typically involved in oculomotion and attention. • Social orienting activated extrastriate regions more than nonsocial orienting. • When IOR was generated (nonsocial cues, long SOA), subcortical regions were recruited more strongly. • A predominantly cortical social orienting mechanism may have evolved from a predominantly subcortical system for nonsocial automatic orienting. fMRI data analysis: Analysis with FSL Images thresholded at Z > 2.3 Cluster size p <.05 or • References • Driver, J., Davis, G., Ricciardelli, P., Kidd, P., Maxwell, E., & Baron-Cohen, S. (1999). Gaze perception triggers reflexive visuospatial orienting. Visual Cognition, 6, 509-540. • Friesen, C. K., & Kingstone, A. (1998). The eyes have it! Reflexive orienting is triggered by nonpredictive gaze. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5, 490-495. • Frischen, A., Smilek, D., Eastwood, J.D., & Tipper, S.P. (2007) Inhibition of return in response to gaze cues: The roles of time course and fixation cue. Visual Cognition, 15(8). 881-895. • Hietanen, J.K., Nummenmaa, L., Nymann, M.J., Parkkola, R., & Hamalainen, H. (2006). Automatic attention orienting by social and symbolic cues activates different neural networks: an fMRI study. Neuroimage, 33(1), 406-413. • McKee, D., Christie, J., & Klein, R. (2007). On the uniqueness of attentional capture by uninformative gaze cues: facilitation interacts with the Simon effect and is rarely followed by IOR. Can J Exp Psychol, 61(4), 293-303. • Tipper, C.M., Handy, T. C., Giesbrecht, B., & Kingstone, A.F. (2008). Brain responses to biological relevance. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(5), 879-891. Contact: Deanna J. Greene djgreene@ucla.edu

More Related