Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39486611›Full record

ArticleNeurobiology of learning and memory2024

Attentional processing in the rat dorsal posterior parietal cortex.

Victoria R Heimer-McGinn, Taylor B Wise, Emma R Halter, Dominique Martin, Victoria L Templer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurobiology of learning and memory, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Victoria R Heimer-McGinnDepartment of Psychology and Program in Neuroscience, Providence College, United States; Department of Psychology, Roger Williams University, United States.
Taylor B WiseDepartment of Psychology and Program in Neuroscience, Providence College, United States; Department of Cognitive and Psychological Sciences, Brown University, United States.
Emma R HalterDepartment of Psychology and Program in Neuroscience, Providence College, United States.
Dominique MartinDepartment of Psychology and Program in Neuroscience, Providence College, United States.
Victoria L TemplerDepartment of Psychology and Program in Neuroscience, Providence College, United States. Electronic address: vtempler@providence.edu.

Funding

Training CoreP20GM103430 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF RHODE ISLAND · PI Ang Cai · 2012 to 2026
$63.6M
Neural Bases of Internal States Driving Social Attention and PerceptionK00MH139083 · NIMH · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI Taylor Blaine Wise · 2024 to 2026
$267k
Posterior Parietal Contributions to Spatial and Social CognitionF99NS129180 · NINDS · BROWN UNIVERSITY · PI WISE, TAYLOR BLAINE · 2022 to 2023
$96k
NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM103430NIMH NIH HHS K00 MH139083NINDS NIH HHS F99 NS129180
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The human posterior parietal cortex (PPC) is known to support sustained attention. Specifically, top-down attention is generally processed in dorsal regions while bottom-up regulation occurs more ventrally. In rodent models, however, it is still unclear whether the PPC is required for sustained attention, or whether there is a similar functional dissociation between anatomical regions. Consequently, the aim of this study was to investigate the contribution of the rodent dorsal PPC (dPPC) in sustained attention. We used the five-choice serial reaction time task (5CSRTT) and compared rats with neurotoxic dPPC lesions to sham operated rats. We found that rats with dPPC lesions were less accurate and took longer to make correct choices, indicating impaired attention and reduced processing speed. This effect, however, was limited to the first few days of post-operative testing. After an apparent recovery, omissions became elevated in the lesion group, which, in the absence of reduced motivation and mobility, can also be interpreted as impaired attention. In subsequent challenge probes, the lesion group displayed globally elevated latency to make a correct response, indicating reduced processing speed. No differences in premature responses or perseverative responses were observed at any time, demonstrating that dPPC lesions did not affect impulsivity and compulsivity. This pattern of behavior suggests that while intact dPPC supports goal-driven (top-down) modulation of attention, it likely does not play a central role in processing stimulus-driven (bottom-up) attention. Furthermore, compensatory mechanisms can support sustained attention in the absence of a fully functioning dPPC, although this occurs at the expense of processing speed. Our results inform the literature by confirming that rodent PPC is involved in regulating sustained attention and providing preliminary evidence for a functional dissociation between top-down and bottom-up attentional processing.

Indexed as

AttentionParietal LobeReaction TimeAnimalsMaleRatsRats, Long-EvansAttentionNMDA lesionOperant chamberPosterior parietal cortex

Identifiers

PMID39486611
PMCPMC11624975

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.