ArticleJournal of vision2025
The precision of attention controls attraction of population receptive fields.
Article in Journal of vision, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We alter our sampling of visual space not only by where we direct our gaze, but also by where and how we direct our attention. Attention attracts receptive fields toward the attended position, but our understanding of this process is limited. Here we show that the degree of this attraction toward the attended locus is dictated not just by the attended position, but also by the precision of attention. We manipulated attentional precision while using 7T functional magnetic resonance imaging to measure population receptive field (pRF) properties. Participants performed the same color-proportion detection task either focused at fixation (0.1° radius) or distributed across the entire display (>5° radius). We observed blood oxygenation level-dependent response amplitude increases as a function of the task, with selective increases in foveal pRFs for the focused attention task and vice versa for the distributed attention task. Furthermore, cortical spatial tuning changed as a function of attentional precision. Specifically, focused attention more strongly attracted pRFs toward the attended locus compared with distributed attention. This attraction also depended on the degree of overlap between a pRF and the attention field. A Gaussian attention field model with an offset on the attention field explained our results. Together, our observations indicate the spatial distribution of attention dictates the degree of its resampling of visual space.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.