Attention 2

Talk Session: Sunday, May 17, 2026, 8:15 – 9:45 am, Talk Room 1
Moderator: Thomas Sprague, UC Santa Barbara

Schedule of Events | Search Abstracts | Symposia | Talk Sessions | Poster Sessions

Talk 1, 8:15 am, 31.11

Cortical double dissociation for endogenous and exogenous covert spatial attention

Marisa Carrasco¹, Nina M. Hanning^1,2, Antonio Fernandez¹, Qingyuan (Rachel) Chen¹, Hsing-Hao Lee¹; ¹NYU, ²Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

[Background] Psychophysical studies have shown that both endogenous (voluntary) and exogenous (involuntary) covert spatial attention enhance visual sensitivity, but in distinct ways. fMRI research indicates that these attention types recruit partially overlapping brain regions. However, because fMRI is correlational, neurostimulation is required to establish critical and infer causal involvement. Here, we used transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to investigate whether early visual cortex (V1/V2) and the human homologue of the right frontal eye field (rFEF+) are equally critical for both attention types. [Method] We used double-pulse TMS during an orientation- discrimination task in which attention was manipulated with valid or invalid cues preceding one of two oriented Gabor patches or neutral cues preceding both. In the endogenous-attention experiments, an informative central cue preceded the Gabor stimuli by 500 ms; in the exogenous-attention experiments, a non-informative peripheral cue preceded the display by 100 ms. A response cue indicated the target location–the stimulus on which the orientation discrimination was to be performed. MRI-guided TMS was applied to each observer’s V1/V2 or rFEF+ during stimulus presentation, targeting the cortical representation of either to the target or the distractor. Psychometric contrast-response functions were obtained, and sensitivity (d’) was analyzed separately for the target-stimulated and distractor-stimulated hemifields. [Results] For both attention types and both areas, when the distractor was stimulated, we observed response-gain benefits at attended locations and costs at unattended locations. Critically, however, when the target was stimulated, TMS to V1/V2 eliminated exogenous but not endogenous attention effects. In contrast, TMS to rFEF+ significantly reduced endogenous attention, but not exogenous attention. [Conclusion] These findings reveal a double dissociation: early visual areas V1/V2 are critical for exogenous but not endogenous attention, whereas rFEF+ is essential for endogenous but not exogenous attention. This dissociation highlights that distinct areas support voluntary and involuntary covert selection.

Talk 2, 8:30 am, 31.12

Neural Markers of Distractor Suppression in the Early Visual Cortex

Sojung Youn¹, Brian Anderson¹; ¹Texas A&M University

Although physically salient stimuli generate a strong priority signal in the attentional system, it is possible to suppress attentional processing of salient stimuli under certain conditions. Distractor suppression has been extensively examined using behavioral and electroencephalographic measures; however, its underlying neural mechanisms, particularly at the early stages of visual information processing, remain underexplored. Therefore, in the present study, we investigated whether we are able to detect evidence of distractor suppression at a neural level in the early visual cortex using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), in an attempt to better understand the core mechanism of distractor suppression. Participants performed a four-item feature-based visual search task for a shape-defined target amongst heterogeneously-shaped non-targets, one of which was sometimes rendered in a unique color (the physically salient distractor). We observed behavioral evidence of suppression where participants showed a significant distractor-presence benefit in response time during both the laboratory practice session (48ms) and while performing the task in the scanner (42ms). This behavioral indicator of distractor suppression was positively correlated with distractor-evoked blood oxygen level dependent (BOLD) response in the early visual cortex, suggesting that the initial strength of the priority signal evoked by the distractor in the early stages of visual information processing could serve as a marker triggering suppression at later stages of visual information processing. In addition to our current findings, all stimuli were presented with superimposed oriented gratings and multivoxel pattern analysis (MVPA) will be performed on the gratings to examine how distractor suppression is related to the fidelity of stimulus representation in early visual areas.

Talk 3, 8:45 am, 31.13

Whole-brain Representation of Object, Attention, and Load

Shijie Qu¹ (), Marvin Chun¹, Yaoda Xu¹; ¹Yale University

When exploring the world around us, we often direct attention to specific features of a target object under varying levels of task demands. Thus, to support visual processing, the brain needs to represent object information, attentional modulation, and the overall task load. Although prior studies have examined these components in isolation and have linked object representations primarily to occipitotemporal cortex (OTC) and task representations to frontoparietal cortex, it remains largely unknown how the representations extend beyond these localized regions and interact across the whole brain. In this fMRI project, we tested this idea by placing colored dots on top of objects and orthogonally manipulating object category, selective attention (attending to color vs shape), and task load (1back vs 2back repetition detection). Multivoxel pattern analysis revealed that all three forms of information were reliably decodable across occipitotemporal cortex (OTC), posterior parietal cortex (PPC), and prefrontal cortex (PFC). While object category was decoded most strongly in OTC, its representation became increasingly distributed over PPC and PFC, encompassing most of the cortical surface when shape was attended at the higher load. In contrast, attention and load were consistently decodable across much of the cortical surface, including and beyond OTC, PPC, and PFC. Cross decoding analyses further showed that object and attention representations were highly interdependent, whereas task load was encoded more independently across the cortical surface. Together, in addition to confirming the role of canonical regions such as OTC, PPC, and PFC in object, attention, and load processing, respectively, our findings provided fresh evidence that these representations are not uniquely localized to these regions, but are instead encoded simultaneously within and beyond them across the broader cortical surface.

This research was supported by NIH grant R01EY030854 to YX.

Talk 4, 9:00 am, 31.14

A central-field focus in ventral-stream feedback to the primary visual cortex (V1) in primates: theoretical prediction confirmed

Piotr Majka¹, Li Zhaoping², Marcello Rosa³; ¹Laboratory of Neuroinformatics, Nencki Institute of Experimental Biology of the Polish Academy of Sciences, ²University of Tübingen, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Tübingen, Germany, ³Department of Physiology and Neuroscience Program, Biomedicine Discovery Institute, Monash University, Clayton, Australia

The central-peripheral dichotomy (CPD) theory is motivated by the fact that an attentional bottleneck allows only a tiny fraction of visual inputs to reach recognition. It proposes that the peripheral visual field primarily serves to select this fraction --- by directing gaze or attention --- whereas the central field is specialized for object recognition within the selected inputs. Because of this bottleneck, the feedforward information from the primary visual cortex (V1) to downstream visual areas is limited, constraining ongoing recognition. To compensate, downstream areas send feedback to upstream regions such as V1 to query for task-relevant information. The CPD theory therefore proposes that this feedback should target mainly the central visual field. Since the ventral stream is specialized for recognition, the theory predicts that ventral stream feedback to V1 is concentrated in the central field representation. We tested this prediction by injecting cellular-resolution retrograde anatomical tracers in locations representing various visual eccentricities (2˚- 18˚) in V1 of marmoset monkeys. Given V1’s position in the visual processing hierarchy, feedforward connections to V1 originate primarily (if not exclusively) in the lateral geniculate nucleus, whereas feedback connections arise from multiple cortical areas.  As predicted, the proportion of V1-projecting connections originating from feedback sources varied systematically with eccentricity. In the ventral stream as well as V2, this proportion was approximately ten times higher for the central field representation than for the peripheral representation. Moreover, with V2 excluded, ventral stream dominated feedback to the central visual field (<5˚), whereas dorsal stream dominated feedback to peripheral V1 (up to 18˚).   These findings suggest that the brain’s architecture for vision should be understood not only in terms of distinct cortical areas, but also in terms of the qualitative differences in computation applied to the central versus peripheral visual fields in each area.

National Science Centre grant (2019/35/D/NZ4/03031) to PM; European Commission EBRAINS 2.0 (101147319 FSTP) to PM; University of Tübingen and the Max Planck Society to LZ;

Talk 5, 9:15 am, 31.15

History-Driven Suppression Reshapes Visuospatial Tuning Across the Visual Hierarchy

Dock Duncan¹, Gilles de Hollander², Ningkai Wang¹, David Richter³, Tomas Knapen¹, Jan Theeuwes^1,3,4,5; ¹Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands, ²University of Zurich, Switzerland, ³University of Granada, Spain, ⁴William James Center for Research, ISPA-Instituto Universitario, Lisbon, Portugal, ⁵Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China

A large body of behavioural work has provided strong evidence that visual information processing dynamically adapts to recent experiences, already at the earliest levels of the visual system. However, the precise neural mechanisms by which our visual system is biased towards previous target locations and away from previous distractor locations remains largely speculative. Here, in a high powered 7-tesla fMRI project, we investigated how history effects alter visuospatial tuning during visual search using a novel population receptive field (pRF) modelling approach. Thirty participants across two sessions each performed a version of the additional singleton task with a high-probability distractor location. While participants searched for the target while ignoring the distractor, we continuously presented moving, flickering checkerboard bars in the centre of the screen, allowing us to model the receptive field responses across the visual processing hierarchy concurrently while they performed the task. Estimated population receptive field parameters show that visuospatial receptive fields shifted away from the current high-probability distractor location in each block. The magnitude of receptive field shifts increased up the visual processing hierarchy, reflecting growing field sizes and implicating higher visual processing areas as more influential in the familiar learned suppression effect. Together, our results provide novel insights into how experience alter the flow of salient information through the visual system by biasing competitive interactions away from suppressed regions. Crucially, we demonstrate that our early visual system is not static but dynamically adapts to recent experiences, with implications for how we should think of early visual processing in the brain.

Jan Theeuwes was supported by an NWO grant (406.21.GO.034)

Talk 6, 9:30 am, 31.16

The Brain Mechanisms of Attentional Lapses During Goal Competition: An EEG Study

Matthieu Chidharom¹ (), Monica Rosenberg¹, Edward Vogel¹; ¹The University of Chicago

Sustained attention is the ability to maintain focus on a specific goal over time, but attentional lapses are frequent. Theories have attributed these lapses to a transient failure of cognitive control in maintaining the goal in mind. However, this proposal has been challenged by recent findings showing greater engagement of cognitive control during states more prone to lapses. To explain this result, we proposed that lapses occur when goals compete, requiring stronger cognitive control to sustain performance. We recently tested this goal-competition hypothesis with a Switch-Continuous Performance Task (CPT) in which subjects alternated task goals between blocks—either switching or holding the same goal—in an effort to manipulate periods of higher and lower competition between goals. Participants viewed a bilateral display showing a letter (vowel/consonant) and a number (even/odd) on each trial. After every 20 trials, a cue instructed participants to perform either the letter task (e.g., press for frequent vowels, not infrequent consonants) or the number task (e.g., press for frequent even, not infrequent odd, numbers). Our results showed that lapses were more frequent when competition between goals was higher during switch compared to repeat trials. Although this result has been replicated several times, the brain mechanisms by which competing goals favor lapses remain unclear. In the current study, we recorded the EEG of 30 participants during the Switch-CPT. Our ERP analysis revealed that competition between goals reduces the attention allocated to the relevant stimulus, as revealed by the lower N2pc amplitude during switch trials. Follow-up analyses showed that this effect is driven by a failure to suppress the distracting goal. A decoding analysis also revealed lower classification accuracy of task goals during switch compared to repeat trials, providing additional evidence that the relevant goal is less activated in mind during competition.