Encyclopedia of Computational Neuroscience

Living Edition
| Editors: Dieter Jaeger, Ranu Jung

Target Selection vs. Response Selection

Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7320-6_320-1


Target selection refers to the process of selecting a single object from a field of multiple objects as the goal of a movement. It can also be used to refer to the deployment of covert attention to a selected object, even when an overt movement is not ultimately made. For overt actions, target selection specifies the movement goal (or end point), but not necessarily the effector that will be used or the trajectory that will be taken to reach the goal. In contrast, response selection is the process of choosing the appropriate action to take in response to a given stimulus. It is the intermediate process occurring between discrimination of a stimulus and planning of an action and usually involves a learned stimulus-to-response (S-R) mapping. For example, when driving a car toward an intersection, the usual response to a red traffic light (stimulus) is to press the brake pedal in order to stop the car (response).

Detailed Description

Target Selection

Natural environments are...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. Bisley JW, Goldberg ME (2010) Attention, intention, and priority in the parietal lobe. Annu Rev Neurosci 33:1–21PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bunge SA, Hazeltine E, Scanlon MD, Rosen AC, Gabrieli JD (2002) Dissociable contributions of prefrontal and parietal cortices to response selection. Neuroimage 17:1562–1571PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cisek P, Kalaska JF (2010) Neural mechanisms for interacting with a world full of action choices. Annu Rev Neurosci 33:269–298PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Fitts PH, Seeger CM (1953) S–R compatibility: spatial characteristics of stimulus and response codes. J Exp Psychol 46:199–210PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hick WE (1952) On the rate of gain of information. Q J Exp Psychol 4:11–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hoshi E, Tanji J (2007) Distinctions between dorsal and ventral premotor areas: anatomical connectivity and functional properties. Curr Opin Neurobiol 17:234–242PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Itti L, Koch C (2001) Computational modeling of visual attention. Nat Rev Neurosci 2:194–203PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Koch C, Ullman S (1985) Shifts in selective visual attention: towards the underlying neural circuitry. Hum Neurobiol 4:219–227PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Kornblum S, Hasbroucq T, Osman A (1990) Dimensional overlap: cognitive basis for stimulus – response compatibility – a model and taxonomy. Psychol Rev 97:253–270PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Krauzlis RJ, Lovejoy LP, Zénon A (2013) Superior colliculus and visual spatial attention. Annu Rev Neurosci 36:165–182PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. McPeek RM, Keller EL (2004) Deficits in saccade target selection after inactivation of superior colliculus. Nat Neurosci 7:757–763PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Pashler H (1994) Dual-task interference in simple tasks: data and theory. Psychol Bull 116:220–244PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Rushworth MF, Walton ME, Kennerley SW, Bannerman DM (2004) Action sets and decisions in the medial frontal cortex. Trends Cogn Sci 8:410–417PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Schall JD, Thompson KG (1999) Neural selection and control of visually guided eye movements. Annu Rev Neurosci 22:241–259PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Scherberger H, Andersen RA (2007) Target selection signals for arm reaching in the posterior parietal cortex. J Neurosci 27:2001–2012PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Schumacher EH, Jiang Y (2003) Neural mechanisms for response selection: representation specific or modality independent? J Cogn Neurosci 15:1077–1079PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Shires J, Joshi S, Basso MA (2010) Shedding new light on the role of the basal ganglia-superior colliculus pathway in eye movements. Curr Opin Neurobiol 20:717–725PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Song JH, Rafal RD, McPeek RM (2011) Deficits in reach target selection during inactivation of the midbrain superior colliculus. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 108:1433–1440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Wilke M, Turchi J, Smith K, Mishkin M, Leopold DA (2010) Pulvinar inactivation disrupts selection of movement plans. J Neurosci 30:8650–8659PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Wolfe JM (1994) Guided search 2.0: a revised model of visual search. Psychon B Rev 1:202–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Zelinsky GJ (2008) A theory of eye movements during target acquisition. Psychol Rev 115:787–835PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Biological and Vision Sciences, SUNY College of OptometryState University of New YorkNew YorkUSA