JN Fuel your research with LabChart
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol 97: 1600-1609, 2007. First published November 29, 2006; doi:10.1152/jn.00978.2005
0022-3077/07 $8.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
97/2/1600    most recent
00978.2005v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fecteau, J. H.
Right arrow Articles by Munoz, D. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fecteau, J. H.
Right arrow Articles by Munoz, D. P.

Warning Signals Influence Motor Processing

Jillian H. Fecteau and Douglas P. Munoz

Centre for Neuroscience Studies, Canadian Institute of Health Research Group in Sensory-Motor Systems, Department of Physiology, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada

Submitted 19 September 2005; accepted in final form 22 November 2006

When observers initiate responses to visual targets, they do so sooner when a preceding stimulus indicates that the target will appear shortly. This consequence of a warning signal may change neural activity in one of four ways. On the sensory side, the warning signal may speed up the rate at which the target is registered by the brain or enhance the magnitude of its signal. On the motor end, the warning signal may lower the threshold required to initiate a response or speed up the rate at which activity accumulates to reach threshold. Here, we describe which explanation is better supported. To accomplish this end, monkeys performed different versions of a cue-target task while we monitored the activity of visuomotor and motor neurons in the superior colliculus. Although the cue target task was designed to measure the properties of reflexive spatial attention, there are two events in this task that produce nonspecific warning effects: a central reorienting event (brightening of central fixation marker) that is used to direct attention away from the cue, and the presentation of the cue itself. Monopolizing on these tendencies, we show that warning effects are associated with several changes in neural activity: the target-related response is enhanced, the threshold for initiating a saccade is lowered, and the rate at which activity accumulates toward threshold rises faster. Ultimately, the accumulation of activity toward threshold predicted behavior most closely. In the discussion, we describe the implications and limitations of these data for theories of warning effects and potential avenues for future research.


Present address and address for reprint requests and other correspondence: J. H. Fecteau, Vision and Cognition Group, Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience, Meibergdreef 47, 1105BA Amsterdam, The Netherlands, (E-mail: j.fecteau{at}nin.knaw.nl)




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
P. Boulinguez, M. Jaffard, L. Granjon, and A. Benraiss
Warning Signals Induce Automatic EMG Activations and Proactive Volitional Inhibition: Evidence From Analysis of Error Distribution in Simple RT
J Neurophysiol, March 1, 2008; 99(3): 1572 - 1578.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2007 by the The American Physiological Society.