PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 22, 2026European Journal of Neuroscience1 citationsOpen Access

Contextual Updating in Attentional Orienting Relies on the Right Temporoparietal Junction: Evidence From rTMS

View Full Paper
GPGiorgia ParisiUniversity of VeronaCMChiara MazziUniversity of VeronaECElisabetta ColombariUniversity of Verona

Key Points

  • The research aims to clarify the role of the right temporoparietal junction in attentional reorienting and contextual updating.
  • Applied rTMS to the rTPJ during a location-cueing paradigm.
  • Participants performed a discrimination task in a Posner-like setup.
  • Compared effects of active rTMS and sham stimulation on attentional processes.
  • Participants demonstrated sustained attention at the attended location under both conditions.
  • rTMS selectively impaired the ability to update predictive attentional contexts.
  • No evidence was found supporting rTPJ involvement in triggering reorienting of attention to unexpected locations.

Abstract

ABSTRACT The right temporoparietal junction (rTPJ) has been associated with multiple cognitive functions. Particularly, its involvement in attentional processes has been proposed, representing a key node in shifting and reorienting visuospatial attention toward unexpected stimuli. However, more recent evidence has demonstrated a more postperceptual function, suggesting a crucial engagement of rTPJ in contextual updating mechanisms. Therefore, considering the lack of consensus, the aim of the current study was to elucidate rTPJ contribution to attentional processes by applying repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) throughout the administration of a location‐cueing paradigm. Importantly, the latter was built in order to permit the disentangling of two critical attentional mechanisms: visuospatial reorienting and contextual updating. Data were collected from young healthy participants performing a discrimination task in a Posner‐like paradigm while online rTMS interfered with rTPJ activity starting from 250 ms after the target onset (three pulses at 20 Hz per trial). Comparing behavioral outcomes of the active rTMS condition with a Sham condition (i.e., no stimulation), allowed us to directly observe rTMS effects on the neural processes at hand. Our findings showed an intact advantage of being attentionally focused on the attended location along with the cost of rearranging attentional resources to the unattended location in both rTMS and Sham condition, thus supporting that rTPJ should not be involved in triggering the reorienting of attention toward unexpected locations. Rather, rTMS selectively affected participants' ability to update the predictive attentional context, letting us conclude that rTPJ could be engaged in postperceptual and contextual updating mechanisms.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Parisi et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/699a9dc0482488d673cd3e93https://doi.org/10.1111/ejn.70429
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper