Neuropsicologiadell’attenzionePaolo Bartolomeo

www.marsicanus.free.fr

“tutti sanno che cos’è l’attenzione. E’ la presa di possesso da parte della mente, in una forma chiara e vivida, di uno dei molteplici oggetti o linee di pensieroapparentemente possibili in uno stesso momento... [l’attenzione] implica il ritirarsi da alcune cose per occuparsi efficacemente di altre”

James, The Principles of Psychology, 1890

Tassonomia dell’attenzione

1. Selezione2. Vigilanza3. Controllo

1. Selezione

1. Selezione

• Fattori limitanti:– Capacità percettiva

» Broadbent, Perception and Communication, 1958

– Un movimento per volta» Allport (1989). Visual attention. In Posner (Ed.), Foundations of

cognitive science.

Broadbent, Perception and Communication, 1958

1. Selezione

1. Selezione

Feature integration theory

Tempo di risposta

N° elementi

Tempo di risposta

N° elementi

Feature integration theory

Tempo di risposta

N° elementi

Tempo di risposta

N° elementi

Feature integration theory

Tempo di risposta

N° elementi

Tempo di risposta

N° elementi

1. Selezione• Attenzione selettiva spaziale

– Orientamento esogeno– Orientamento endogeno

TIME

cuevalid

target

Posner, Walker, Friedrich, & Rafal, J Neurosci 4:1863-74, 1984

Posner, Walker, Friedrich, & Rafal, J Neurosci 4:1863-74, 1984

TIME

cueinvalid

target

Bartolomeo, Siéroff, Decaix & Chokron, Exp Brain Res 137:424-31, 2001

CONTROLS

200

400

600

150 550 1000 150 550 1000

SOA (ms)

RT

(ms)

VALIDINVALID

Exp. 2: 80% Valid Trials

LEFT RIGHT

300

350

400

450

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550

SOA (in ms)

RT (i

n m

s)ValidInvalid

IOR

Facilitation

Inhibition of the return of attentionto previously attended locations

Posner & Cohen, in Attention and Performance X: 531-56, 1984

Exogenous Cuing: Basic Effects

Bartolomeo, Siéroff, Decaix & Chokron, Exp Brain Res 137:424-31, 2001

CONTROLS

200

400

600

150 550 1000 150 550 1000

SOA (ms)

RT

(ms)

VALIDINVALID

LEFT RIGHT

Exp. 1: 50% Valid Trials

Bartolomeo, Siéroff, Decaix & Chokron, Exp Brain Res 137:424-31, 2001

CONTROLS

200

400

600

150 550 1000 150 550 1000

SOA (ms)

RT

(ms)

VALIDINVALID

Exp. 3: 20% Valid Trials

LEFT RIGHT

1,000

SOA (ms)

BENEFIT

COST

200 400 600 800

ENDOGENOUS

EXOGENOUS

IOR

Müller & Findlay, Acta Psychol 69: 129-55, 1988

EXPECTED LOCATION

UNEXPECTED LOCATION

Orienting and Cueing Effects: Procedure

100 / 500 / 1000 msec

SOA

50% 50%

Invalid Valid

EXP 1

20% 80%EXP 2

80% 20%EXP 3

Lupiáñez, Decaix, Siéroff, Chokron, Milliken & Bartolomeo, Exp Brain Res 159:447-57, 2004

320340360380400420440460480500520

100 500 1000SOA (in ms)

RT (in

ms)

Valid Invalid

No Expectancy

Orienting and Cueing Effects: Results

Lupiáñez, Decaix, Siéroff, Chokron, Milliken & Bartolomeo, EBR 2004

320340360380400420440460480500520

100 500 1000 100 500 1000 100 500 1000SOA (in ms)

RT (in

ms)

Valid Invalid

Expected Location Unexpected LocationNo Expectancy

Comparable IOR (p >.2)

Orienting and Cueing Effects: Results

Lupiáñez, Decaix, Siéroff, Chokron, Milliken & Bartolomeo, EBR 2004

Other evidence - 1

Berger, Henik & Rafal, J Exp Psych Gen 134:207-21, 2005

SLOWER RT FASTER RT

Other evidence - 2

Berlucchi, Chelazzi, & Tassinari, J Cogn Neurosci, 12:648-63, 2000

Attend here

Attend here

SLOWER RT FASTER RT

Conclusion: (at least) 2 possibilities

1. IOR has nothing to do with orienting of attention

2. IOR only occurs with exogenous orienting (which can, by implication, dissociate from endogenous orienting)

Berlucchi, Chelazzi, & Tassinari, J Cogn Neurosci, 12:648-63, 2000

“the co-occurrence of different facilitatory and inhibitory effects confirms the simultaneous operation of multiple independent attentional mechanisms during covert orienting”

Corbetta & Shulman, Nat Rev Neurosci 3:201-15, 2002

2. Vigilanza

– Capacità di mantenere nel tempo un’attivitàcoerente• Fasica (frazioni di secondo)• Tonica (frazioni di un’ora)

3. Controllo

– Capacità di mantenere nel tempo un’attivitàcoerente malgrado gli stimoli che possono distrarre l’attenzione• Stroop• Antisaccadi

3. Controllo: Stroop

ROSSO VERDE BLU

ROSSO VERDE BLU

3. Controllo: Stroop spaziale

CONGRUENTE

INCONGRUENTE

Attraction magnétique3. Controllo: Antisaccadi

Anterior Network Executive control Posterior Network Orienting, Selection, Focusing…General Activation Network Alertness / Vigilance

Posner’s Attentional Networks (Posner & Petersen, 1990):

Posner’s Attentional Networks (Posner & Petersen, 1990)Interaction between the Networks

Anterior Network

Posterior Network

General Activation Network

Exogenous - Endogenous Orienting of Attention

Rapid reaction to external stimuli

Clearing of Consciousness

How to measure Attentional Performance?

Anterior Network Executive control:

Conflict situations: Stroop, Flankers…

Posterior Network Spatial Orienting:

Effect of cues indicating target’s location/scale

General Activation Network Unspecific Preparation:

Non-spatial cues (sounds, lights…)

A task to measure the functioning of each Attentional Network

Use of a Procedure which combines appropriate manipulations for each Attentional Network:

Spatial Stroop, Exogenous Orienting, and Non-Spatial Auditory cues (Funes & Lupiáñez, 2003)

Flanker Interference, Endogenous Orienting, and Non-Spatial Visual cues (Fan et al., 2002)

Endogenous orienting and Visual-Auditory alerting cues (Fernandez-Duque & Posner, 1997)

Fan et al.’ (2002) Attentional Network Test

Anterior Network Flanker Task:

Posterior Network and General Activation Networks:Peripheral Cue

Double Cue

Central Cue

No Cue

Orienting

Alertness

How to measure the interactions between the Attentional Networks ?

An Independent Variable to measure each attentional function:

Flanker task Anterior Network

Exogenous Spatial Cueing Posterior Network

Auditory Non-Spatial Cue Alerting Network

Callejas, Lupiáñez, Funes & Tudela (EBR, 2005)PF1=400-1600ms

50ms

400ms

100msSOA=450ms

400 ms

TR f 1700msSOA=500

3500–TR-PF1msAdapted from Fan et al. (2002)

450475500525550575600625650

Cognitive Control

Incongruent Congruent

450475500525550575600625650

Orienting

Uncued Cued

IncongruIncongruIncongruIncongruIncongruIncongruCongruCongruCongruCongruCongruCongru

Congruency

UncuedCuedNo CueUncuedCuedNo CueVisual Cue

With Auditory CueWithout Auditory CueAuditory Cue

450475500525550575600625650

Alertness

Without With Auditory Cue

Design

Results

IncongruIncongruIncongruIncongruIncongruIncongruCongruCongruCongruCongruCongruCongru

Congruency

UncuedCuedNo CueUncuedCuedNo CueVisual Cue

With Auditory CueWithout Auditory CueAuditory CueCognitive Control modulated by Orienting and Alertness

450475500525550575600625650

No Alertness Alertness

Incongruent Congruent

450475500525550575600625650

Cued Uncued

Incongruent CongruentResults: Network Interactions

IncongruIncongruIncongruIncongruIncongruIncongruCongruCongruCongruCongruCongruCongru

Congruency

UncuedCuedNo CueUncuedCuedNo CueVisual Cue

With Auditory CueWithout Auditory CueAuditory CueModulation of Alerting over Spatial Orienting

450475500525550575600625650

No Alertness Alertness

Uncued CuedResults: Alerting x Orienting Interaction

NO INTERACTION

Posner’s Attentional Networks (Posner & Petersen, 1990)Interaction between the Networks

Anterior Network

Posterior Network

General Activation Network

0

10

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550

Time course

Orie

ntin

g Ef

fect

|

+

Orienting

Orienting +Alerting

Alertness Increases Orienting

…… Time 1

------ Time 2

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550

Time course

Orie

ntin

g Ef

fect

I

+

Orienting

Orienting +Alerting

Alertness Speeds UP Orienting

…… Time 1

------ Time 2

Manipulation of SOAPF1=400-1600ms

50ms

400ms

100msSOA=450ms

400 ms

TR f 1700msSOA=500

3500–TR-PF1msCallejas, Lupiáñez, Funes & Tudela EBR 2005

50ms

50 / 450ms

SOA= 100 / 500

450475500525550575600625650

Cognitive Control

Incongruent Congruent

450475500525550575600625650

Orienting

Uncued Cued

IncongruIncongruIncongruIncongruIncongruIncongruCongruCongruCongruCongruCongruCongru

Congruency

UncuedCuedNo CueUncuedCuedNo CueVisual Cue

With Auditory CueWithout Auditory CueAuditory Cue

450475500525550575600625650

Alertness

Without With Auditory Cue

Design

Results

IncongruIncongruIncongruIncongruIncongruIncongruCongruCongruCongruCongruCongruCongru

Congruency

UncuedCuedNo CueUncuedCuedNo CueVisual Cue

With Auditory CueWithout Auditory CueAuditory CueCognitive Control modulated by Orienting and Alertness

450475500525550575600625650

No Alertness Alertness

Incongruent Congruent

450475500525550575600625650

Cued Uncued

Incongruent CongruentResults: Network Interactions

IncongruIncongruIncongruIncongruIncongruIncongruCongruCongruCongruCongruCongruCongru

Congruency

UncuedCuedNo CueUncuedCuedNo CueVisual Cue

With Auditory CueWithout Auditory CueAuditory CueModulation of Alerting over Spatial Orienting

450475500525550575600625650

No Alertness Alertness

Uncued CuedResults: LONG SOA

NO INTERACTION

525

550

575

600

625

No Alertness Alertness

Uncued Cued

Results: SHORT SOA (100 ms)

525

550

575

600

625

No Alertness Alertness

Uncued Cued

Long SOA Short SOA

Conclusions IThe three Attentional Networks can be measured independently of each other:

Fan et al. (2002); Funes & Lupiáñez (2003); Callejas et al. (2004, 2005)

However, in normal functioning they interact with each other:

Spatial Orienting/Focusing can modulate Cognitive ControlPerhaps by making easier selection, thus reducing interference ?

Alertness modulates Cognitive Control:Inhibition of the Anterior Network by Alertness ?

Alertness modulates Spatial OrientingNot by Increasing Orienting but by Speeding it up

Conclusions IIThe ANT-I task might be useful for the evaluation of neural damage patients:

1) By providing an estimate of the functioning of each Attentional Network

2) To evaluate, not only the damage of a specific Brain Area, and so a specific Attentional Function…

but also the interactions between the different attentional functions in coherent behaviour