I have developed "tennis elbow" from lugging this book around the past four weeks, but it is worth the pain, the effort, and the aspirin. It is also worth the (relatively speaking) bargain price. Including appendixes, this book contains 894 pages of text. The entire panorama of the neural sciences is surveyed and examined, and it is comprehensive in its scope, from genomes to social behaviors. The editors explicitly state that the book is designed as "an introductory text for students of biology, behavior, and medicine," but it is hard to imagine any audience, interested in any fragment of neuroscience at any level of sophistication, that would not enjoy this book. The editors have done a masterful job of weaving together the biologic, the behavioral, and the clinical sciences into a single tapestry in which everyone from the molecular biologist to the practicing psychiatrist can find and appreciate his or

Principles of Neural Science

Recent studies of eye movements in reading and other information processing tasks, such as music reading, typing, visual search, and scene perception, are reviewed. The major emphasis of the review is on reading as a specific example of cognitive processing. Basic topics discussed with respect to reading are (a) the characteristics of eye movements, (b) the perceptual span, (c) integration of information across saccades, (d) eye movement control, and (e) individual differences (including dyslexia). Similar topics are discussed with respect to the other tasks examined. The basic theme of the review is that eye movement data reflect moment-to-moment cognitive processes in the various tasks examined. Theoretical and practical considerations concerning the use of eye movement data are also discussed.

/pdf/eye-movements-in-reading-and-information-processing-20-years-3z5ay8hdwc.pdf

Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research.

Miller (1956) summarized evidence that people can remember about seven chunks in short-term memory (STM) tasks. How- ever, that number was meant more as a rough estimate and a rhetorical device than as a real capacity limit. Others have since suggested that there is a more precise capacity limit, but that it is only three to five chunks. The present target article brings together a wide vari- ety of data on capacity limits suggesting that the smaller capacity limit is real. Capacity limits will be useful in analyses of information processing only if the boundary conditions for observing them can be carefully described. Four basic conditions in which chunks can be identified and capacity limits can accordingly be observed are: (1) when information overload limits chunks to individual stimulus items, (2) when other steps are taken specifically to block the recoding of stimulus items into larger chunks, (3) in performance discontinuities caused by the capacity limit, and (4) in various indirect effects of the capacity limit. Under these conditions, rehearsal and long-term memory cannot be used to combine stimulus items into chunks of an unknown size; nor can storage mechanisms that are not capacity- limited, such as sensory memory, allow the capacity-limited storage mechanism to be refilled during recall. A single, central capacity limit averaging about four chunks is implicated along with other, noncapacity-limited sources. The pure STM capacity limit expressed in chunks is distinguished from compound STM limits obtained when the number of separately held chunks is unclear. Reasons why pure capacity estimates fall within a narrow range are discussed and a capacity limit for the focus of attention is proposed.

/pdf/the-magical-number-4-in-short-term-memory-a-reconsideration-3704b9phuz.pdf

The magical number 4 in short-term memory: a reconsideration of mental storage capacity.

Traditional approaches to human information processing tend to deal with perception and action planning in isolation, so that an adequate account of the perception-action interface is still missing On the perceptual side, the dominant cognitive view largely underestimates, and thus fails to account for, the impact of action-related processes on both the processing of perceptual information and on perceptual learning On the action side, most approaches conceive of action planning as a mere continuation of stimulus processing, thus failing to account for the goal-directedness of even the simplest reaction in an experimental task We propose a new framework for a more adequate theoretical treatment of perception and action planning, in which perceptual contents and action plans are coded in a common representational medium by feature codes with distal reference Perceived events (perceptions) and to-be-produced events (actions) are equally represented by integrated, task-tuned networks of feature codes – cognitive structures we call event codes We give an overview of evidence from a wide variety of empirical domains, such as spatial stimulus-response compatibility, sensorimotor synchronization, and ideomotor action, showing that our main assumptions are well supported by the data

https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0140525X01000103

The Theory of Event Coding (TEC): a framework for perception and action planning.

Many current neurophysiological, psychophysical, and psychological approaches to vision rest on the idea that when we see, the brain produces an internal representation of the world. The activation of this internal representation is assumed to give rise to the experience of seeing. The problem with this kind of approach is that it leaves unexplained how the existence of such a detailed internal representation might produce visual consciousness. An alternative proposal is made here. We propose that seeing is a way of acting. It is a particular way of exploring the environment. Activity in internal representations does not generate the experience of seeing. The outside world serves as its own, external, representation. The experience of seeing occurs when the organism masters what we call the governing laws of sensorimotor contingency. The advantage of this approach is that it provides a natural and principled way of accounting for visual consciousness, and for the differences in the perceived quality of sensory experience in the different sensory modalities. Several lines of empirical evidence are brought forward in support of the theory, in particular: evidence from experiments in sensorimotor adaptation, visual \"filling in,\" visual stability despite eye movements, change blindness, sensory substitution, and color perception.

A sensorimotor account of vision and visual consciousness-Authors' Response-Acting out our sensory experience

Saccade target selection and object recognition: evidence for a common attentional mechanism.

Walker, Robin, Heiner Deubel, Werner X. Schneider, and John M. Findlay. Effect of remote distractors on saccade programming: evidence for an extended fixation zone. J. Neurophysiol. 78: 1108–1119, ...

/pdf/effect-of-remote-distractors-on-saccade-programming-evidence-o1krlm2pz6.pdf

Effect of Remote Distractors on Saccade Programming: Evidence for an Extended Fixation Zone

Postsaccadic target blanking prevents saccadic suppression of image displacement.

This paper introduces a new neuro-cognitive Visual Attention Model, called VAM. It is a model of visual attention control of segmentation, object recognition, and space-based motor action. VAM is concerned with two main functions of visual attention-that is “selection-for-object-recognition” and “selection-for-space-based-motor-action”. The attentional control processes that perform these two functions restructure the results of stimulus-driven and local perceptual grouping and segregation processes, the “visual chunks”, in such a way that one visual chunk is globally segmented and implemented as an “object token”. This attentional segmentation solves the “inter- and intra-object-binding problem”. It can be controlled by higher-level visual modules of the what-pathway (e.g. V4/IT) and/or the where-pathway (e.g. PPC) that contain relatively invariant “type-level” information (e.g. an alphabet of shape primitives, colors with constancy, locations for space-based motor actions). What-based attention...

VAM: A neuro-cognitive model for visual attention control of segmentation, object recognition, and space-based motor action

The primate visual system can be divided into a ventral stream for perception and recognition and a dorsal stream for computing spatial information for motor action. How are selection mechanisms in both processing streams coordinated? We recently demonstrated that selection-for-perception in the ventral stream (usually termed “visual attention”) and saccade target selection in the dorsal stream are tightly coupled (Deubel & Schneider, 1996). Here we investigate whether such coupling also holds for the preparation of manual reaching movements. A dual-task paradigm required the preparation of a reaching movement to a cued item in a letter string. Simultaneously, the ability to discriminate between the symbols “E” and “∃” presented tachistoscopically within the surrounding distractors was taken as a measure of perceptual performance. The data demonstrate thatdiscrimination performance is superior when the discrimination stimulus is also the target for manual aiming; when the discrimination stimulus and point...

Werner X. Schneider

Papers

Saccade target selection and object recognition: evidence for a common attentional mechanism.

Effect of Remote Distractors on Saccade Programming: Evidence for an Extended Fixation Zone

Postsaccadic target blanking prevents saccadic suppression of image displacement.

VAM: A neuro-cognitive model for visual attention control of segmentation, object recognition, and space-based motor action

Selective Dorsal and Ventral Processing: Evidence for a Common Attentional Mechanism in Reaching and Perception