Advertisement

The Influence of the Body and Action on Spatial Attention

  • Catherine L. Reed
  • John P. Garza
  • Ralph J. RobertsJr.
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4840)

Abstract

Research on spatial attention traditionally focuses on how it is influenced by the location of objects within the visual environment. However, a primary function of spatial attention is to plan physical actions. When events occur in the world, visual information needs to be integrated with current body position to help prepare effective responses to these events. Further, current actions can subsequently influence further deployments of attention. Thus, spatial attention must be considered within the context of the body. Here we present research demonstrating that one’s own body and the actions of others can influence spatial attention mechanisms, influencing the prioritization of functional space near the body and the direction of attention. This work emphasizes a need for an embodied theory of spatial attention and a more dynamic neural model of attention that adjusts to meet the demands of the current environment and the perceiver’s goals.

Keywords

spatial attention embodiment covert orienting human body 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Previc, F.H.: The neuropsychology of 3-d space. Psychological Bulletin 124, 123–164 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Prinz, W.: Perception and action planning. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 9, 129–154 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vecera, S.P., Rizzo, M.: Spatial attention: Normal processes and their breakdown. Neurologic Clinics of North America 21, 575–607 (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tipper, S.P.: Attention and action. In: Gazzaniga, M. (ed.) The Cognitive Neurosciences, 3rd edn., pp. 619–630. MIT Press, Boston (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Braun, J., Koch, C., Davis, J.L.: Visual attention and cortical circuits. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pashler, H.: Attention. Psychology Press, San Diego, CA (1998)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Posner, M.I., Cohen, Y.: Components of visual orienting. In: Bouma, H., Bouwhuis, D.G. (eds.) Attention and Performance X, pp. 531–555. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ (1984)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Desimone, R., Duncan, J.: Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. Annual Review of Neuroscience 18, 193–222 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ungerleider, L.G., Mishkin, M.: Two cortical visual systems. In: Ingle, D.J., Goodale, M.A., Mansfield, R.J.W. (eds.) Analysis of Visual Behavior, pp. 549–586. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (1982)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Darling, W.G., Miller, G.F.: Perception of arm orientation in three-dimensional space. Experimental Brain Research 102, 495–502 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Guerraz, M., Navarro, J., Ferrero, F., Cremieux, J., Blouin, J.: Perceived versus actual head-on-trunk orientation during arm movement control. Experimental Brain Research 172, 221–229 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bradshaw, J.L., Mattingley, J.B.: Clinical Neuropsychology. Academic Press, New York (1995)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Karnath, H.O., Christ, K., Hartje, W.: Decrease of contralateral neglect by neck muscle vibration and spatial orientation of trunk midline. Brain 116, 383–396 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Karnath, H.O., Schenkel, P., Fischer, B.: Trunk orientation as the determining factor in the ’contralateral’ deficit in the neglect syndrome and as the anchor of the internal representation of the body in space. Brain 114, 1997–2014 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rubens, A.B.: Caloric irrigation and unilateral visual neglect. Neurology 35, 1019–1024 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Karnath, H.-O.: Subjective body orientation in neglect and the interactive contribution of neck muscle proprioception and vestibular stimulation. Brain 117, 1001–1012 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pizzamiglio, L., Frasca, R., Guariglia, C., Incoccia, C., Antonucci, G.L.: Effect of optokinetic stimulation in patients with visual neglect. Cortex 26, 535–540 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Vallar, G., Guariglia, C., Rusconi, L.: Modulation of the neglect syndrome by sensory stimulation. In: Thier, P., Karnath, H.-O. (eds.) Parietal Lobe Contributions to Orientation in 3D Space, pp. 556–578. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg (1997)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rorden, C., Karnath, H.O., Driver, J.: Do neck-proprioceptive and caloric-vestibular stimulation influence covert visual attention in normals, as they influence visual neglect? Neuropsychologia 39, 364–375 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hasselbach-Haitzeg, M.M., Reuter-Lorenz, P.A.: Egocentric body-centered coordinates modulate visuomotor performance. Neuropsychologia 40, 1822–1833 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Grubb, J.D., Reed, C.L.: Trunk orientation induces neglect-like performance in intact individuals. Psychological Science 13, 554–557 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Heilman, K.M., Schwartz, H.D., Watson, R.T.: Hypoarousal in patients with the neglect syndrome and emotional indifference. Neurology 28, 229–232 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hjaltson, H., Tegner, R., Kerstin, T., Levander, M., Ericson, K.: Sustained attention and awareness of disability in chronic neglect. Neuropsychologia 34, 1229–1233 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Robertson, I.H., Manly, T., Beschin, N., Daini, R., Haeske-Dewick, H., Hömberg, V., Jehkonen, M., Pizzamiglio, G., Shiel, A., Weber, E.: Auditory sustained attention is a marker of unilateral spatial neglect. Neuropsychologia 35, 1527–1532 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Robertson, I.H., Mattingley, J.B., Rorden, C., Driver, J.: Phasic alerting of neglect patients overcomes their spatial deficit in visual awareness. Nature 395, 169–172 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Grubb, J.D., Reed, C.L., Bate, S., Garza, J.P., Roberts, R.J.: Walk this way, look that way: the effects of trunk orientation and locomotion on visual attention. Manuscript under review  (2007)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Biguer, B., Jeannerod, M., Prablanc, C.: The role of position of gaze in movement accuracy. In: Posner, M.I., Marin, O.S. (eds.) Attention and Performance XI, pp. 407–424. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ (1985)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Karnath, H.O.: Neural encoding of space in egocentric coordinates: Evidence for and limits of a hypothesis derived from patients with parietal lesions and neglect. In: Thier, P., Karnath, H.-O. (eds.) Parietal Lobe Contributions to Orientation in 3D Space, pp. 497–520. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Rizzolatti, G., Gentilucci, M., Matelli, M.: Selective spatial attention: One center, one circuit, or many circuits? In: Posner, M.I., Marin, O.S. (eds.) Attention and Performance XI, pp. 251–265. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ (1985)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Graziano, M.S.A., Gross, C.G.: Mapping space with neurons. Current Directions in Psychological Science 3, 164–167 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Graziano, M.S.A., Gross, C.G.: The representation of extrapersonal space: A possible role for bimodal visual-tactile neurons. In: Gazzaniga, M.S. (ed.) The Cognitive Neurosciences, pp. 1021–1034. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (1995)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Graziano, M.S.A., Yap, G.S., Gross, C.G.: Coding visual space by premotor neurons. Science 226, 1054–1057 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Cooke, D.F., Graziano, M.S.A.: Sensorimotor integration in the precentral gyrus: polysensory neurons and defensive movements. Journal of Neurophysiology 91, 1648–1660 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Fogassi, L., Gallese, G., di Pellegrino, G., Fadiga, M., Gentilucci, G., Luppino, M., Pedotti, A., Rizzolatti, G.: Space coding by premotor cortex. Experimental Brain Research 89, 686–690 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Fogassi, L., Gallese, G., Fadiga, M., Luppino, M., Matelli, M., Rizzolatti, G.: Coding of peripersonal space in inferior premotor cortex area f4. Journal of Neurophysiology 76, 141–157 (1996)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Gentilucci, M., Fogassi, G., Luppino, G., Matelli, R., Camarda, R., Rizzolatti, G.: Visual responses in the postarcuate cortex area 6 of the monkey that are independent of eye position. Experimental Brain Research 71, 475–490 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Graziano, M.S.A., Gross, C.G.: A bimodal map of space: Tactile receptive fields in the macaque putamen with corresponding visual receptive fields. Experimental Brain Research 97, 96–109 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Graziano, M.S.A., Gross, C.G.: Spatial maps for the control of movement. Current Directions in Neurobiology 8, 195–201 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Iriki, A., Tanaka, M., Iwamura, Y.: Coding of modified body schema during tool use by macaque postcentral neurons. NeuroReport 7, 2325–2330 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Iriki, A., Tanaka, M., Obayashi, S., Iwamura, Y.: Self-images in the video monitory coded by monkey intraparietal neurons. Neuroscience Research 40, 163–173 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Obayashi, S., Tanaka, M., Iriki, A.: Subjective image of invisible hand coded by monkey intraparietal neurons. NeuroReport 11, 3499–3505 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Rizzolatti, G., Scandolara, C., Matelli, M., Gentilucci, M.: Afferent properties of postarcuate neurons in macaque monkeys. ii. visual responses. Behavioural Brain Research 2, 147–163 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    di Pellegrino, G., Ládavas, E., Farné, A.: Seeing where your hands are. Nature 388, 730 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Farné, A., Ládavas, E.: Dynamic size-change of hand peripersonal space following tool use. NeuroReport 11, 1645–1649 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Farné, A., Pavani, F., Menghello, F., Ládavas, E.: Left tactile extinction following visual stimulation of a rubber hand. Brain 123, 2350–2360 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Ládavas, E.: Functional and dynamic properties of visual peripersonal space. Trends in the Cognitive Sciences 6, 17–22 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Ládavas, E., Pellegrino, G., Farné, A., Zeloni, G.: Neuropsychological evidence of an integrated visuotactile representation of peripersonal space in humans. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 10, 581–589 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Ládavas, E., Zeloni, G., Farné, A.: Visual peripersonal space centered on the face in humans. Brain 121, 2317–2326 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Reed, C.L., Grubb, J.D., Steele, C.: Grasping attention: Behavioral consequences of bimodal neurons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 32, 166–177 (2006)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Reed, C.L., Betz, R., Garza, J.P., Roberts, R.J.: Functional consequences of bimodal neurons on spatial attention. Manuscript under reviewGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Buxbaum, L.J., Coslett, H.B.: Spatio-motor representations in reaching: Evidence for subtypes of optic ataxia. Cognitive Neuropsychology 15, 279–312 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Coslett, H.B., Lie, E.: Bare hands and attention: evidence for a tactile representation of the human body. Neuropsychologia 42, 1865–1876 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Schendel, K., Robertson, L.C.: Reaching out to see: Arm position can attenuate human visual loss. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 16, 1–9 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Garza, J., Reed, C., Roberts, R.: Grab it! action plus attention cues covert attention. Paper presented at the 46th Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Houston, TX (2006)Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Tipper, S.P., Howard, L.A., Houghton, G.: Action-based mechanisms of attention. In: Humphreys, G.W., Duncan, J. (eds.) Attention, Space, and Action: Studies in Cognitive Neuroscience, pp. 232–247. Oxford University Press, London (1999)Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Loula, F., Prasad, S., Harber, K., Shiffrar, M.: Recognizing people from their movement. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 31, 210–220 (2005)Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Reed, C.L., Stone, V.E., Bozova, S., Tanaka, J.: The body inversion effect. Psychological Science 14, 302–308 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Friesen, C.K., Kingstone, A.: The eyes have it! reflexive orienting is triggered by nonpredictive gaze. Psychonomic Bulletin Review 5, 490–495 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Kingstone, A., Tipper, C., Ristic, J., Ngan, E.: The eyes have it!: An fmri investigation. Brain and Cognition 55, 269–271 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Langton, S.R.H., Bruce, V.: You must see the point: Automatic processing of cues to the direction of social attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 26, 747–757 (2000)Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Heitanen, J.K.: Social attention orienting integrates information from head and body orientation. Psychological Research 66, 174–179 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Reed, C.L., Gervais, W., Beall, P., Roberts, R.J., Ho, M., McCarley, K.E.: Human action directs attention. Paper presented at the 45th Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Toronto, ONT, Canada (2005)Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Roberts, R.J., Ondrejko, M.: Perception, action, and skill: Looking ahead to meet the present. In: Haith, M.M., Benson, J.B., Roberts, Jr., R.J., Pennington, B.F. (eds.) The development of future-oriented processes, pp. 87–117. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1994)Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Neisser, U.: Cognition and reality: Principles and implications of cognitive psychology. W.H. Freeman, San Francisco (1976)Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Bryan, W L., Harter, N.: The role of position of gaze in movement accuracy. Psychological Review 6, 345–375 (1899)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Lashley, K.S.: The problem of serial order in behavior. In: Jeffress, L.A. (ed.) Cerebral mechanisms in behavior: The Hixon symposium, pp. 112–146. Wiley, New York (1954)Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Miller, G.A., Galanter, E., Pribram, K.H.: Plans and the structure of behavior. Hold, Reinehart, and Winston, New York (1960)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Catherine L. Reed
    • 1
    • 2
  • John P. Garza
    • 1
  • Ralph J. RobertsJr.
    • 1
  1. 1.UNIVERSITY OF DENVER, Department of Psychology, 2155 S. Race St., Denver CO 80210USA
  2. 2.CLAREMONT MCKENNA COLLEGE, Department of Psychology, 850 Columbia Ave., Claremont CA 91711USA

Personalised recommendations