.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
Return
Partially Different Mechanisms of Social and Nonsocial Attention: Evidence From Changes in Cueing Effects and Underlying Frontal Cortex Processing Over Time
.png){kind=icon}
OA
AI
DOI：10.1111/psyp.70286.png)
.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
Share.png){kind=icon}
Save
Abstract
En 中文
Gaze conveys important information about one's intentions and likely object of reference. Because processes of attention may change over time, for reasons including fatigue or experience, this study aimed to compare mechanisms of gaze and arrow cueing effects by measuring across sessions. On two separate occasions, 39 young adults underwent a cueing paradigm with valid or invalid gaze or arrow cues, as well as neutral cues. Activation in frontal cortex regions implicated in the dorsal and ventral attention networks was examined during task performance using functional near-infrared spectroscopy. Behavioral results showed comparable orienting (valid vs. neutral) and reorienting (invalid vs. valid) responses following gaze and arrow cues, which did not significantly change over sessions. However, the gaze cue elicited a significantly greater alerting effect (i.e., more benefits from the presence of the cue on reaction time) than the arrow cue in Session 2. Parallel to these behavioral findings, neuroimaging results indicated robust (de-)activation during orienting and reorienting. Aligning with the greater alerting effect, target detection elicited significantly greater activation in the left posterior dorsomedial frontal cortex following gaze cues as opposed to arrow cues in Session 2. Therefore, insofar as changes over time are concerned, our findings offer converging evidence that gaze and arrow cues follow partially different attentional and neural mechanisms.
Keywords:
alerting
fNIRS
gaze
orienting
prefrontal cortex
social attention
AI Summary
Key information extracted from the uploaded paper, including a brief overview, abstract, background, key highlights, visual analysis, and future outlook.
Journal
IF:
2.8
Papers:
417
Citations:
1.6W