The Frontal Cortex and Exogenous Attentional Orienting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Normal functioning of the attentional orienting system is critical for effective behavior and is predicated on a balanced interaction between goal-directed (endogenous) processes and stimulus-driven (exogenous) processes. Although both systems have been subject to much investigation, little is known about the neural underpinnings of exogenous orienting. In the present study, we examined the early facilitatory effects and later inhibition of return effects of exogenous cues in patients with frontal and parietal lesions. Three novel findings emerged from this study. First, unilateral frontoparietal damage appears not to affect the early facilitation effects of exogenous cues. Second, dorsolateral prefrontal damage, especially lesions involving the inferior frontal gyrus, produces an exogenous disengage deficit (i.e., the sluggish withdrawal of attention from the ipsilesional to the contralesional field). Third, a subset of patients with dorsolateral prefrontal damage, with lesions involving the middle frontal gyrus, have a reorienting deficit that extends in duration well beyond established boundaries of the normal reflexive orienting system. These results suggest that the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex plays an important role in exogenous orienting and that component processes of this system may be differentially impaired by damage to different parts of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".