Yale University.
Yale School of Medicine.
J Cogn Neurosci. 2018 Feb;30(2):160-173. doi: 10.1162/jocn_a_01197. Epub 2017 Oct 17.
Although we typically talk about attention as a single process, it comprises multiple independent components. But what are these components, and how are they represented in the functional organization of the brain? To investigate whether long-studied components of attention are reflected in the brain's intrinsic functional organization, here we apply connectome-based predictive modeling (CPM) to predict the components of Posner and Petersen's influential model of attention: alerting (preparing and maintaining alertness and vigilance), orienting (directing attention to a stimulus), and executive control (detecting and resolving cognitive conflict) [Posner, M. I., & Petersen, S. E. The attention system of the human brain. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 13, 25-42, 1990]. Participants performed the Attention Network Task (ANT), which measures these three factors, and rested during fMRI scanning. CPMs tested with leave-one-subject-out cross-validation successfully predicted novel individual's overall ANT accuracy, RT variability, and executive control scores from functional connectivity observed during ANT performance. CPMs also generalized to predict participants' alerting scores from their resting-state functional connectivity alone, demonstrating that connectivity patterns observed in the absence of an explicit task contain a signature of the ability to prepare for an upcoming stimulus. Suggesting that significant variance in ANT performance is also explained by an overall sustained attention factor, the sustained attention CPM, a model defined in prior work to predict sustained attentional abilities, predicted accuracy, RT variability, and executive control from task-based data and predicted RT variability from resting-state data. Our results suggest that, whereas executive control may be closely related to sustained attention, the infrastructure that supports alerting is distinct and can be measured at rest. In the future, CPM may be applied to elucidate additional independent components of attention and relationships between the functional brain networks that predict them.
虽然我们通常将注意力视为单一过程,但它包含多个独立的组成部分。但是,这些组成部分是什么,它们在大脑的功能组织中是如何表现的呢?为了研究注意力的长期研究成分是否反映在大脑的固有功能组织中,我们在这里应用基于连接组的预测建模(CPM)来预测 Posner 和 Petersen 有影响力的注意力模型的组成部分:警觉(准备和保持警觉和警惕)、定向(将注意力导向刺激)和执行控制(检测和解决认知冲突)[Posner,MI,& Petersen,SE。人类大脑的注意力系统。《年度评论神经科学》,13,25-42,1990]。参与者执行注意力网络任务(ANT),该任务测量这三个因素,并在 fMRI 扫描期间休息。使用留一受试者外交叉验证测试的 CPM 成功地从 ANT 表现期间观察到的功能连接预测了新颖个体的整体 ANT 准确性、RT 变异性和执行控制分数。CPM 还推广到仅从静息状态功能连接预测参与者的警觉分数,这表明在没有明确任务的情况下观察到的连接模式包含对即将到来的刺激进行准备的能力的特征。建议 ANT 性能的显著差异也可以通过整体持续注意力因素来解释,即持续注意力 CPM,这是一种在之前的工作中定义的预测持续注意力能力的模型,它可以从基于任务的数据预测准确性、RT 变异性和执行控制,并且可以从静息状态数据预测 RT 变异性。我们的结果表明,虽然执行控制可能与持续注意力密切相关,但支持警觉的基础设施是不同的,可以在休息时进行测量。在未来,CPM 可能会被应用于阐明注意力的其他独立组成部分以及预测它们的功能大脑网络之间的关系。