Probability Cuing of Target Location Facilitates Visual Search Implicitly in Normal Participants and Patients with Hemispatial Neglect

We explored how variability in the probability of target locations affects visual search in normal individuals and in patients with hemispatial neglect, a deficit in attending to the contralesional side of space. Young and elderly normal participants responded faster when targets appeared in the more probable region than when targets appeared in the less probable region. Similarly, patients were sensitive to the distribution of targets, even in the neglected field. Although the attentional gradient that characterizes neglect was not eliminated, the response facilitation due to the probability distribution was proportionate to that of control participants and equal in magnitude across the neglected field. All participants exploited the uneven distribution of targets to enhance task performance without explicit instructions to do so or awareness of biases in their behavior. These results suggest that attentional orientation and sensitivity to external probabilities are possibly dissociable. An early sensory and a late motor mechanism are postulated as possibly being involved in the observed probability-matching behavior of participants.

[1]  Kenneth M. Heilman,et al.  Hemispace and Hemispatial Neglect , 1987 .

[2]  Hiroshi Tsukagoshi,et al.  Eye-fixation patterns in homonymous hemianopia and unilateral spatial neglect , 1987, Neuropsychologia.

[3]  D. Robinson,et al.  Shared neural control of attentional shifts and eye movements , 1996, Nature.

[4]  M. Kinsbourne,et al.  Effects of left-sided movements on line bisection in unilateral neglect , 1996, Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society.

[5]  Gregory S. Berns,et al.  The Context of Uncertainty Modulates the Subcortical Response to Predictability , 2001, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[6]  F. Sengpiel,et al.  Visual perception: Spotlight on the primary visual cortex , 1999, Current Biology.

[7]  M. Chun,et al.  Contextual Cueing: Implicit Learning and Memory of Visual Context Guides Spatial Attention , 1998, Cognitive Psychology.

[8]  G R Mangun,et al.  Combined expectancies: event-related potentials reveal the early benefits of spatial attention that are obscured by reaction time measures. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[9]  W. Baum,et al.  Matching, undermatching, and overmatching in studies of choice. , 1979, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[10]  G. Humphreys,et al.  BIASED ATTENTIONAL SHIFTS ASSOCIATED WITH UNILATERAL LEFT NEGLECT , 2000, Cognitive Neuropsychology.

[11]  Marlene Behrmann,et al.  Hemispatial Neglect and Visual Search: A Large Scale Analysis , 2004, Cortex.

[12]  J. Marshall,et al.  Hemispheric activation vs spatio-motor cueing in visual neglect: A case study , 1991, Neuropsychologia.

[13]  G. Fink,et al.  Neural consequences of competing stimuli in both visual hemifields: A physiological basis for visual extinction , 2000, Annals of neurology.

[14]  J. Wolfe,et al.  Attention is fast but volition is slow , 2000, Nature.

[15]  U. Greggers,et al.  Matching behavior of honeybees in a multiple-choice situation: The differential effect of environmental stimuli on the choice process , 1997 .

[16]  R J HERRNSTEIN,et al.  Relative and absolute strength of response as a function of frequency of reinforcement. , 1961, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[17]  U. Mayr,et al.  Spatial attention and implicit sequence learning: evidence for independent learning of spatial and nonspatial sequences. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[18]  Glyn W. Humphreys,et al.  The effect of cueing on unilateral neglect , 1983, Neuropsychologia.

[19]  M. Mesulam Spatial attention and neglect: parietal, frontal and cingulate contributions to the mental representation and attentional targeting of salient extrapersonal events. , 1999, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[20]  H. Hoffman,et al.  Unconscious acquisition of complex procedural knowledge. , 1987 .

[21]  S. Mizumori,et al.  Neurons in rat medial prefrontal cortex show anticipatory rate changes to predictable differential rewards in a spatial memory task , 2001, Behavioural Brain Research.

[22]  M. Corbetta,et al.  A Common Network of Functional Areas for Attention and Eye Movements , 1998, Neuron.

[23]  T. Curran,et al.  Effects of aging on visuospatial attention: an ERP study , 2001, Neuropsychologia.

[24]  W. Milberg,et al.  Preattentive and attentive visual search in individuals with hemispatial neglect. , 2000, Neuropsychology.

[25]  Lynn C. Robertson,et al.  Visual Search Performance in the Neglect Syndrome , 1989, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[26]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Priming of pop-out: II. The role of position , 1996, Perception & psychophysics.

[27]  M Behrmann,et al.  Attention accesses multiple reference frames: evidence from visual neglect. , 1999, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[28]  M. Corbetta,et al.  Influence of Stimulus Salience and Attentional Demands on Visual Search Patterns in Hemispatial Neglect , 1997, Brain and Cognition.

[29]  Georg Kerkhoff,et al.  Spatial hemineglect in humans , 2001, Progress in Neurobiology.

[30]  Wilfried Kunde,et al.  Location-specific target expectancies in visual search , 1999 .

[31]  S. Ferber,et al.  Spatial awareness is a function of the temporal not the posterior parietal lobe , 2001, Nature.

[32]  R. Andersen,et al.  Multimodal representation of space in the posterior parietal cortex and its use in planning movements. , 1997, Annual review of neuroscience.

[33]  S. E. Black,et al.  Impaired visual search in patients with unilateral neglect: an oculographic analysis , 1997, Neuropsychologia.

[34]  David E. Irwin,et al.  Visual Search has Memory , 2001, Psychological science.

[35]  M. A. Basso,et al.  Modulation of Neuronal Activity in Superior Colliculus by Changes in Target Probability , 1998, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[36]  Matthew Flatt,et al.  PsyScope: An interactive graphic system for designing and controlling experiments in the psychology laboratory using Macintosh computers , 1993 .

[37]  Glyn W. Humphreys,et al.  Perceptual and Action Systems in Unilateral Visual Neglect , 1987 .

[38]  Michael L. Platt,et al.  Neural correlates of decision variables in parietal cortex , 1999, Nature.

[39]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  Knowing in the context of acting: the task dynamics of the A-not-B error. , 1999, Psychological review.

[40]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Functional Imaging of Neural Responses to Expectancy and Experience of Monetary Gains and Losses tasks with monetary payoffs , 2001 .

[41]  M. Jeannerod Neurophysiological and neuropsychological aspects of spatial neglect. , 1987 .

[42]  M. Shaw,et al.  Optimal allocation of cognitive resources to spatial locations. , 1977, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[43]  M. Kinsbourne Mechanisms of Unilateral Neglect , 1987 .

[44]  Marlene Behrmann,et al.  Mechanisms Underlying Spatial Representation Revealed through Studies of Hemispatial Neglect , 2002, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.