The Left Intraparietal Sulcus Modulates the Selection of Low Salient Stimuli

Neuropsychological and functional imaging studies have suggested a general right hemisphere advantage for processing global visual information and a left hemisphere advantage for processing local information. In contrast, a recent transcranial magnetic stimulation study [Mevorach, C., Humphreys, G. W., & Shalev, L. Opposite biases in salience-based selection for the left and right posterior parietal cortex. Nature Neuroscience, 9, 740–742, 2006b] demonstrated that functional lateralization of selection in the parietal cortices on the basis of the relative salience of stimuli might provide an alternative explanation for previous results. In the present study, we applied a whole-brain analysis of the functional magnetic resonance signal when participants responded to either the local or the global levels of hierarchical figures. The task (respond to local or global) was crossed with the saliency of the target level (local salient, global salient) to provide, for the first time, a direct contrast between brain activation related to the stimulus level and that related to relative saliency. We found evidence for lateralization of salience-based selection but not for selection based on the level of processing. Activation along the left intraparietal sulcus (IPS) was found when a low saliency stimulus had to be selected irrespective of its level. A control task showed that this was not simply an effect of task difficulty. The data suggest a specific role for regions along the left IPS in salience-based selection, supporting the argument that previous reports of lateralized responses to local and global stimuli were contaminated by effects of saliency.

[1]  S. Hevenor,et al.  The effect of variability of unattended information on global and local processing: evidence for lateralization at early stages of processing , 2000, Neuropsychologia.

[2]  Stephen M. Smith,et al.  A global optimisation method for robust affine registration of brain images , 2001, Medical Image Anal..

[3]  K Zilles,et al.  A functional magnetic resonance imaging study of local/global processing with stimulus presentation in the peripheral visual hemifields , 2004, Neuroscience.

[4]  Mark W. Woolrich,et al.  Multilevel linear modelling for FMRI group analysis using Bayesian inference , 2004, NeuroImage.

[5]  Stephen M. Smith,et al.  General multilevel linear modeling for group analysis in FMRI , 2003, NeuroImage.

[6]  Alan Cowey,et al.  Transcranial magnetic stimulation and cognitive neuroscience , 2000, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[7]  A. Nobre,et al.  Where and When to Pay Attention: The Neural Systems for Directing Attention to Spatial Locations and to Time Intervals as Revealed by Both PET and fMRI , 1998, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[8]  Scott T Grafton,et al.  The Anterior Intraparietal Sulcus Mediates Grasp Execution, Independent of Requirement to Update: New Insights from Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation , 2006, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[9]  P. Cavanagh,et al.  Attention Response Functions Characterizing Brain Areas Using fMRI Activation during Parametric Variations of Attentional Load , 2001, Neuron.

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

[11]  N. Kanwisher,et al.  The Generality of Parietal Involvement in Visual Attention , 1999, Neuron.

[12]  M. Corbetta,et al.  Control of goal-directed and stimulus-driven attention in the brain , 2002, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[13]  F. J. Friedrich,et al.  Effects of parietal injury on covert orienting of attention , 1984, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[14]  A Zani,et al.  Electrophysiological evidence of a perceptual precedence of global vs. local visual information. , 1998, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[15]  M. Rushworth,et al.  A primer of magnetic stimulation as a tool for neuropsychology. , 1999, Neuropsychologia.

[16]  J. Duncan,et al.  Common regions of the human frontal lobe recruited by diverse cognitive demands , 2000, Trends in Neurosciences.

[17]  Richard S. J. Frackowiak,et al.  Where in the brain does visual attention select the forest and the trees? , 1996, Nature.

[18]  M. Corbetta,et al.  Superior Parietal Cortex Activation During Spatial Attention Shifts and Visual Feature Conjunction , 1995, Science.

[19]  L. Robertson,et al.  Effects of lesions of temporal-parietal junction on perceptual and attentional processing in humans , 1988, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[20]  A. Pfefferbaum,et al.  Callosal degradation in HIV-1 infection predicts hierarchical perception: A DTI study , 2010, Neuropsychologia.

[21]  N. Kanwisher,et al.  The lateral occipital complex and its role in object recognition , 2001, Vision Research.

[22]  M. Corbetta,et al.  A PET study of visuospatial attention , 1993, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[23]  G A Orban,et al.  Orientation discrimination of objects and gratings compared: an fMRI study , 2001, The European journal of neuroscience.

[24]  Stephen M. Smith,et al.  Temporal Autocorrelation in Univariate Linear Modeling of FMRI Data , 2001, NeuroImage.

[25]  Etienne Olivier,et al.  Salience Representation in the Parietal and Frontal Cortex , 2010, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[26]  H. Heinze,et al.  Electrophysiological correlates of hierarchical stimulus processing: Dissociation between onset and later stages of global and local target processing , 1993, Neuropsychologia.

[27]  Glyn W. Humphreys,et al.  Effects of saliency, not global dominance, in patients with left parietal damage , 2006, Neuropsychologia.

[28]  M. Goldberg,et al.  The representation of visual salience in monkey parietal cortex , 1998, Nature.

[29]  M. Rushworth,et al.  Complementary localization and lateralization of orienting and motor attention , 2001, Nature Neuroscience.

[30]  C D Frith,et al.  Neural mechanisms involved in the processing of global and local aspects of hierarchically organized visual stimuli. , 1997, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[31]  R. Knight,et al.  Component mechanisms underlying the processing of hierarchically organized patterns: inferences from patients with unilateral cortical lesions. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[32]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  A Three-Dimensional Statistical Analysis for CBF Activation Studies in Human Brain , 1992, Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism.

[33]  C. D. Frith,et al.  Brain Activations during Visual Search: Contributions of Search Efficiency versus Feature Binding , 2003, NeuroImage.

[34]  N. Kanwisher,et al.  Visual attention: Insights from brain imaging , 2000, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[35]  Scott O. Murray,et al.  Hemispheric Asymmetry in Global/Local Processing: Effects of Stimulus Position and Spatial Frequency , 2002, NeuroImage.

[36]  G L Shulman,et al.  The Role of Spatial-Frequency Channels in the Perception of Local and Global Structure , 1986, Perception.

[37]  J. Cohen,et al.  Dissociating the role of the dorsolateral prefrontal and anterior cingulate cortex in cognitive control. , 2000, Science.

[38]  Glyn W. Humphreys,et al.  Non-spatial extinction following lesions of the parietal lobe in humans , 1994, Nature.

[39]  Carmel Mevorach,et al.  Opposite biases in salience-based selection for the left and right posterior parietal cortex , 2006, Nature Neuroscience.

[40]  M. A. Steinmetz,et al.  Neuronal responses in area 7a to multiple-stimulus displays: I. neurons encode the location of the salient stimulus. , 2001, Cerebral cortex.

[41]  M. Raichle,et al.  Searching for a baseline: Functional imaging and the resting human brain , 2001, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[42]  J. Theeuwes,et al.  Attentional control during visual search: the effect of irrelevant singletons. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[43]  D. Navon Forest before trees: The precedence of global features in visual perception , 1977, Cognitive Psychology.

[44]  R. Passingham,et al.  The Attentional Role of the Left Parietal Cortex: The Distinct Lateralization and Localization of Motor Attention in the Human Brain , 2001, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[45]  L C Robertson,et al.  The processing of hierarchical stimuli: Effects of retinal locus, locational uncertainty, and stimulus identity , 1988, Perception & psychophysics.

[46]  G. Shulman,et al.  Medial prefrontal cortex and self-referential mental activity: Relation to a default mode of brain function , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[47]  Maryanne Martin Local and global processing: The role of sparsity , 1979 .

[48]  Scott T. Grafton,et al.  Goal Representation in Human Anterior Intraparietal Sulcus , 2006, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[49]  R. S. J. Frackowiak,et al.  Hemispheric specialization for global and local processing: the effect of stimulus category , 1997, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[50]  Antígona Martínez,et al.  Hemispneric asymmetries in global and local processing: evidence from fMRI , 1997, Neuroreport.

[51]  Stephen M. Smith,et al.  Improved Optimization for the Robust and Accurate Linear Registration and Motion Correction of Brain Images , 2002, NeuroImage.

[52]  P. Goldman-Rakic,et al.  Posterior parietal cortex in rhesus monkey: II. Evidence for segregated corticocortical networks linking sensory and limbic areas with the frontal lobe , 1989, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[53]  J. Marshall,et al.  Hemispheric asymmetries in global⧹local processing are modulated by perceptual salience , 1998, Neuropsychologia.

[54]  Michael Brady,et al.  Improved Optimization for the Robust and Accurate Linear Registration and Motion Correction of Brain Images , 2002, NeuroImage.

[55]  P. Goldman-Rakic,et al.  Posterior parietal cortex in rhesus monkey: I. Parcellation of areas based on distinctive limbic and sensory corticocortical connections , 1989, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[56]  G W Humphreys,et al.  Parallel and competitive processes in hierarchical analysis: perceptual grouping and encoding of closure. , 1999, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[57]  Jacqueline Gottlieb,et al.  LIP responses to a popout stimulus are reduced if it is overtly ignored , 2006, Nature Neuroscience.

[58]  J. Mattingley,et al.  Fast and slow parietal pathways mediate spatial attention , 2004, Nature Neuroscience.

[59]  Stephen M Smith,et al.  Fast robust automated brain extraction , 2002, Human brain mapping.

[60]  G. Humphreys,et al.  Attention, spatial representation, and visual neglect: simulating emergent attention and spatial memory in the selective attention for identification model (SAIM). , 2003, Psychological review.

[61]  S Marrett,et al.  Local and global attention are mapped retinotopically in human occipital cortex. , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.