Raposo Isabel, Fiebelkorn Ian C, Lin Jack J, Parvizi Josef, Kastner Sabine, Knight Robert T, Breska Assaf, Helfrich Randolph F
Hertie-Institute for Clinical Brain Research, University Medical Center Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
International Max Planck Research School for the Mechanisms of Mental Function and Dysfunction, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
PLoS Biol. 2025 Jun 27;23(6):e3003232. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3003232. eCollection 2025 Jun.
Attention samples visual space sequentially to enhance behaviorally relevant sensory representations. While traditionally conceptualized as a static continuous spotlight, contemporary models of attention highlight its discrete nature. But which neural mechanisms govern the temporally precise allocation of attention? Periodic brain activity as exemplified by neuronal oscillations as well as aperiodic temporal structure in the form of intrinsic neural timescales have been proposed to orchestrate the attentional sampling process in space and time. However, both mechanisms have been largely studied in isolation. To date, it remains unclear whether periodic and aperiodic temporal structure reflect distinct neural mechanisms. Here, we combined computational simulations with a multimodal approach encompassing five experiments, and three different variants of classic spatial attention paradigms, to differentiate aperiodic from oscillatory-based sampling. Converging evidence across behavior as well as scalp and intracranial electroencephalography (EEG) revealed that periodic and aperiodic temporal regularities can theoretically and experimentally be distinguished. Our results extend the rhythmic sampling framework of attention by demonstrating that aperiodic neural timescales predict behavior in a spatially-, context-, and demand-dependent manner. Aperiodic timescales increased from sensory to association cortex, decreased during sensory processing or action execution, and were prolonged with increasing behavioral demands. These results reveal that multiple, concurrent temporal regularities govern attentional sampling.
依次关注样本的视觉空间,以增强与行为相关的感觉表征。虽然传统上被概念化为一个静态的连续聚光灯,但当代注意力模型强调其离散性质。但是,哪些神经机制控制着注意力在时间上的精确分配呢?以神经元振荡为例的周期性脑活动以及以固有神经时间尺度形式存在的非周期性时间结构,已被提出用于协调注意力在空间和时间上的采样过程。然而,这两种机制在很大程度上都是孤立研究的。迄今为止,尚不清楚周期性和非周期性时间结构是否反映了不同的神经机制。在这里,我们将计算模拟与涵盖五个实验和经典空间注意力范式的三种不同变体的多模态方法相结合,以区分基于振荡的采样和非周期性采样。行为以及头皮和颅内脑电图(EEG)的汇聚证据表明,周期性和非周期性时间规律在理论上和实验上是可以区分的。我们的结果扩展了注意力的节律采样框架,表明非周期性神经时间尺度以空间、上下文和需求依赖的方式预测行为。非周期性时间尺度从感觉皮层到联合皮层增加,在感觉处理或动作执行期间减少,并随着行为需求的增加而延长。这些结果表明,多种并发的时间规律控制着注意力采样。