Participants had to indicate via button presses whether the marked objects were targets or not. In 50% of cases, the offered solution was incorrect, differing by one object from correct target identities. In the LUM condition, the fixation cross was replaced by an Arabic digit. Participants had to indicate via button presses whether the presented number equaled the number of LUM or not. In 50% of cases, the offered solution was incorrect, differing by (+/−) one from correct number of LUM. There were intertrial Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical intervals (ITIs) of 4000 msec. FEF localizer task Previous

studies have associated the FEF with oculomotor control and shifts in spatial attention during visual processing (Anderson et al. 1994; Paus 1996; Corbetta 1998; Pierrot-Deseilligny et al. 2004). Accordingly, in order to localize participants’ FEF, we implemented an FEF localizer (FEF-L; cf. Garg et al. 2007). The display featured the same motion area (roughly 7° of visual angle) and fixation cross (roughly 0.2° of visual angle) Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical as MOT and LUM. Fixation periods Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical (FIX) alternated with saccade periods (SACC), lasting 15 sec, respectively. During FIX, the fixation cross was presented centrally. During SACC, the fixation cross randomly appeared in one of the four

corners of the motion area, changing location in 1500 msec intervals. Participants’ task was to rapidly move their eyes toward the location of appearance. Such exogenous, visually guided saccades comply with eye movements that might occur during MOT despite the instruction to fixate the centrally presented cross. That is, with the specific design of the FEF-L task, we aimed to elicit FEF activation

associated with eye movements that bear characteristics similar to those possibly occurring during MOT (also Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical see Discussion below). Experimental Procedure Both prescreening and fMRI-recording took place at MPI-CBS. All participants had normal or corrected-to-normal selleck catalog vision, gave written consent, and received monetary reward for their participation. Prescreening Aiming to confine eye movements during the experiment in order to reduce FEF involvement to a minimum, we conducted a behavioral prescreening. During MOT, participants’ eye movements were recorded using a remote corneal reflection eye tracker (Tobii 1750, Stockholm, Sweden; software ClearView 2.7.1; sampling rate: 50 Hz). Participant selection was then based on both behavioral performance and the occurrence Brefeldin_A of saccades. fMRI scanning During scanning, participants attended to 100 trials of stimuli (50 MOT, 50 LUM), presented at 25 frames per second (60 Hz refresh rate) with a resolution of 1024 × 768 pixels. The software “Presentation” (Neurobehavioral Systems™, Albany, CA) was used for stimulus presentation and response recording. Using a back projection system, stimuli were displayed above participants’ eyes via a mirror reflecting an LCD projection onto a screen placed behind the magnet.