de Vries Ingmar E J, van Driel Joram, Olivers Christian N L
Institute of Brain and Behavior Amsterdam and Department of Experimental and Applied Psychology, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Institute of Brain and Behavior Amsterdam and Department of Experimental and Applied Psychology, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J Neurosci. 2017 Feb 8;37(6):1591-1603. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2945-16.2016. Epub 2017 Jan 9.
Current models of visual search assume that search is guided by an active visual working memory representation of what we are currently looking for. This attentional template for currently relevant stimuli can be dissociated from accessory memory representations that are only needed prospectively, for a future task, and that should be prevented from guiding current attention. However, it remains unclear what electrophysiological mechanisms dissociate currently relevant (serving upcoming selection) from prospectively relevant memories (serving future selection). We measured EEG of 20 human subjects while they performed two consecutive visual search tasks. Before the search tasks, a cue instructed observers which item to look for first (current template) and which second (prospective template). During the delay leading up to the first search display, we found clear suppression of α band (8-14 Hz) activity in regions contralateral to remembered items, comprising both local power and interregional phase synchronization within a posterior parietal network. Importantly, these lateralization effects were stronger when the memory item was currently relevant (i.e., for the first search) compared with when it was prospectively relevant (i.e., for the second search), consistent with current templates being prioritized over future templates. In contrast, event-related potential analysis revealed that the contralateral delay activity was similar for all conditions, suggesting no difference in storage. Together, these findings support the idea that posterior α oscillations represent a state of increased processing or excitability in task-relevant cortical regions, and reflect enhanced cortical prioritization of memory representations that serve as a current selection filter. Our days are filled with looking for relevant objects while ignoring irrelevant visual information. Such visual search activity is thought to be driven by current goals activated in working memory. However, working memory not only serves current goals, but also future goals, with differential impact upon visual selection. Little is known about how the brain differentiates between current and future goals. Here we show, for the first time, that modulations of brain oscillations in the EEG α frequency band in posterior cortex can dissociate current from future search goals in working memory. Moreover, the dynamics of these oscillations uncover how we flexibly switch focus between memory representations. Together, we reveal how the brain assigns priority for selection.
当前的视觉搜索模型假定,搜索是由我们当前正在寻找的事物的活跃视觉工作记忆表征所引导的。这种针对当前相关刺激的注意模板,可以与仅在未来任务中前瞻性地需要、且应被阻止引导当前注意力的辅助记忆表征区分开来。然而,目前尚不清楚是什么电生理机制,将当前相关(服务于即将到来的选择)与前瞻性相关记忆(服务于未来选择)区分开来。我们在20名人类受试者执行两项连续的视觉搜索任务时,测量了他们的脑电图。在搜索任务之前,一个提示会指示观察者首先寻找哪个项目(当前模板)以及第二个寻找哪个项目(前瞻性模板)。在第一个搜索显示之前的延迟期间,我们发现,在与记忆项目对侧的区域中,α波段(8 - 14赫兹)活动明显受到抑制,这包括后顶叶网络内的局部功率和区域间相位同步。重要的是,与记忆项目是前瞻性相关(即用于第二次搜索)相比,当记忆项目是当前相关(即用于第一次搜索)时,这些偏侧化效应更强,这与当前模板比未来模板具有更高优先级一致。相比之下,事件相关电位分析表明,所有条件下的对侧延迟活动相似,这表明在存储方面没有差异。总之,这些发现支持了这样一种观点,即后部α振荡代表任务相关皮质区域中加工增加或兴奋性增强的状态,并反映了作为当前选择过滤器的记忆表征在皮质层面上的优先级增强。我们每天都充斥着寻找相关物体,同时忽略不相关的视觉信息。这种视觉搜索活动被认为是由工作记忆中激活的当前目标所驱动的。然而,工作记忆不仅服务于当前目标,也服务于未来目标,对视觉选择有不同的影响。关于大脑如何区分当前和未来目标,人们知之甚少。在这里,我们首次表明,后皮质脑电图α频段的脑振荡调制可以在工作记忆中区分当前和未来的搜索目标。此外,这些振荡的动态变化揭示了我们如何在记忆表征之间灵活地切换焦点。总之,我们揭示了大脑如何分配选择的优先级。