4.6 Article

Cingulate activation increases dynamically with response speed under stimulus unpredictability

期刊

CEREBRAL CORTEX
卷 17, 期 7, 页码 1664-1671

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhl075

关键词

anterior cingulate; attention; bottom-up; intertrial variability; posterior cingulate; reaction time

资金

  1. Intramural NIH HHS [Z99 DA999999] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Functional magnetic resonance imaging studies of cognition require repeated and consistent engagement of the cognitive process under investigation. Activation is generally averaged across trials that are assumed to tax a specific mental operation or state, whereas intraindividual variability in performance between trials is usually considered error variance. A more recent analysis approach postulates that these fluctuations can reflect variation in the very process taxed by the particular trial type. In the present study, participants responded to targets presented randomly in 1 of 4 peripheral locations. By employing a function of reaction time (RT) of individual trials as a linear regressor, brain regions were identified whose activation varied with RT on a trial-by-trial basis. Wholebrain analysis revealed that the anterior cingulate, posterior cingulate, and left angular/superior temporal gyri were more active in trials with faster RT but only when the target location was unpredictable. No such association was seen in trials where the target location was predicted by a central cue. These results suggest a role for the cingulate and angular gyri in the dynamic regulation of attention to unpredictable events. This is in accordance with the function of a default network that is active in the absence of top-down-focused attention and is thought to continuously provide resources for broad and spontaneous information gathering. Exploiting intertrial performance variability may be particularly suitable for capturing such spontaneous and elusive phenomena as stimulus-driven processes of attention.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据