Person:

Cavanagh, Patrick

Loading...
Profile Picture

Email Address

AA Acceptance Date

Birth Date

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Job Title

Last Name

Cavanagh

First Name

Patrick

Name

Cavanagh, Patrick

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Publication

    Anatomical Constraints on Attention: Hemifield Independence Is a Signature of Multifocal Spatial Selection

    (Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, 2012) Alvarez, George; Gill, Jonathan; Cavanagh, Patrick

    Previous studies have shown independent attentional selection of targets in the left and right visual hemifields during attentional tracking (Alvarez & Cavanagh, 2005) but not during a visual search (Luck, Hillyard, Mangun, & Gazzaniga, 1989). Here we tested whether multifocal spatial attention is the critical process that operates independently in the two hemifields. It is explicitly required in tracking (attend to a subset of object locations, suppress the others) but not in the standard visual search task (where all items are potential targets). We used a modified visual search task in which observers searched for a target within a subset of display items, where the subset was selected based on location (Experiments 1 and 3A) or based on a salient feature difference (Experiments 2 and 3B). The results show hemifield independence in this subset visual search task with location-based selection but not with feature-based selection; this effect cannot be explained by general difficulty (Experiment 4). Combined, these findings suggest that hemifield independence is a signature of multifocal spatial attention and highlight the need for cognitive and neural theories of attention to account for anatomical constraints on selection mechanisms.

  • Publication

    Onset Rivalry: The Initial Dominance Phase Is Independent Of Ongoing Perceptual Alternations

    (Frontiers Research Foundation, 2011) Stanley, Jody; Forte, Jason D.; Cavanagh, Patrick; Carter, Olivia

    Binocular rivalry has been used to study a wide range of visual processes, from the integration of low-level features to the selection of signals that reach awareness. However, many of these studies do not distinguish between early and late phases of rivalry. There is clear evidence that the “onset” stage of rivalry is characterized by stable, yet idiosyncratic biases that are not evident in the average dominance of sustained rivalry viewing. Low-level stimulus features also have robust effects in the onset phase that are not seen in sustained rivalry, suggesting these phases may be driven at least partly by different neural mechanisms. The effects of high-level cognitive and affective factors at onset are less clear but also show differences from their effects in sustained viewing. These findings have important implications for the interpretation of any rivalry experiments using brief presentation paradigms and for understanding how the brain copes with binocular discrepancies in natural viewing conditions in which our eyes constantly move around an ever-changing environment. This review will summarize current research and explore the factors influencing this “onset” stage.

  • Publication

    Within-Hemifield Competition in Early Visual Areas Limits the Ability to Track Multiple Objects with Attention

    (Society for Neuroscience, 2014-08-27) Stormer, Viola S.; Alvarez, George; Cavanagh, Patrick

    It is much easier to divide attention across the left and right visual hemifields than within the same visual hemifield. Here we investigate whether this benefit of dividing attention across separate visual fields is evident at early cortical processing stages. We measured the steady-state visual evoked potential, an oscillatory response of the visual cortex elicited by flickering stimuli, of moving targets and distractors while human observers performed a tracking task. The amplitude of responses at the target frequencies was larger than that of the distractor frequencies when participants tracked two targets in separate hemifields, indicating that attention can modulate early visual processing when it is divided across hemifields. However, these attentional modulations disappeared when both targets were tracked within the same hemifield. These effects were not due to differences in task performance, because accuracy was matched across the tracking conditions by adjusting target speed (with control conditions ruling out effects due to speed alone). To investigate later processing stages, we examined the P3 component over central-parietal scalp sites that was elicited by the test probe at the end of the trial. The P3 amplitude was larger for probes on targets than on distractors, regardless of whether attention was divided across or within a hemifield, indicating that these higher-level processes were not constrained by visual hemifield. These results suggest that modulating early processing stages enables more efficient target tracking, and that within-hemifield competition limits the ability to modulate multiple target representations within the hemifield maps of the early visual cortex.