ABSTRACT
Much of the language we encounter in our everyday lives comes in the form of conversation, yet the majority of research on the neural basis of language comprehension has used input from only one speaker at a time. Twenty adults were scanned while passively observing audiovisual conversations using functional magnetic resonance imaging. In a block-design task, participants watched 20 s videos of puppets speaking either to another puppet (the dialogue condition) or directly to the viewer (the monologue condition), while the audio was either comprehensible (played forward) or incomprehensible (played backward). Individually functionally localized left-hemisphere language regions responded more to comprehensible than incomprehensible speech but did not respond differently to dialogue than monologue. In a second task, participants watched videos (1-3 min each) of two puppets conversing with each other, in which one puppet was comprehensible while the other's speech was reversed. All participants saw the same visual input but were randomly assigned which character's speech was comprehensible. In left-hemisphere cortical language regions, the time course of activity was correlated only among participants who heard the same character speaking comprehensibly, despite identical visual input across all participants. For comparison, some individually localized theory of mind regions and right-hemisphere homologues of language regions responded more to dialogue than monologue in the first task, and in the second task, activity in some regions was correlated across all participants regardless of which character was speaking comprehensibly. Together, these results suggest that canonical left-hemisphere cortical language regions are not sensitive to differences between observed dialogue and monologue.
ABSTRACT
The lateralized ERP N2pc component has been shown to be an effective marker of attentional object selection when elicited in a visual search task, specifically reflecting the selection of a target item among distractors. Moreover, when targets are known in advance, the visual search process is guided by representations of target features held in working memory at the time of search, thus guiding attention to objects with target-matching features. Previous studies have shown that manipulating working memory availability via concurrent tasks or within task manipulations influences visual search performance and the N2pc. Other studies have indicated that visual (non-spatial) vs. spatial working memory manipulations have differential contributions to visual search. To investigate this the current study assesses participants' visual and spatial working memory ability independent of the visual search task to determine whether such individual differences in working memory affect task performance and the N2pc. Participants (n = 205) completed a visual search task to elicit the N2pc and separate visual working memory (VWM) and spatial working memory (SPWM) assessments. Greater SPWM, but not VWM, ability is correlated with and predicts higher visual search accuracy and greater N2pc amplitudes. Neither VWM nor SPWM was related to N2pc latency. These results provide additional support to prior behavioral and neural visual search findings that spatial WM availability, whether as an ability of the participant's processing system or based on task demands, plays an important role in efficient visual search.
ABSTRACT
There are a number of factors that may influence the shape and scope of the gradient of visual attention. This study examined the role of attentional set in determining the scope and presence of suppression in the gradient of visual selective attention observed in the P1 event related potential waveform. Twenty-two participants were asked to attend to a specific location and respond to a target stimulus. However, thirty percent of the time, the stimulus could also appear at one of 7 other locations (three ipsilateral to the attended location and four contralateral). Attentional set was varied by changes in the instructions to avoid confounds created by changing the stimuli. In half of the study participants were asked to respond only to stimuli that appeared at the designated location. In the other half of the study participants were asked to attend to the designated location but respond to all stimuli. Results demonstrate a significant main effect of attentional set, with greater processing when participants were asked to respond to all stimuli as compared to when they were only asked to respond to stimuli at the designated location. Additionally a significant interaction between visual field and location shows greater differences in processing (i.e. an attentional effect) at locations closer to the designated location. Findings are discussed in relation to the scope and gradient of attention.
