We investigated the effect of microstimulation of the superficial layers of the superior colliculus (SC) on the performance of animals in a peripheral detection paradigm while maintaining fixation. In a matching-to-sample paradigm, a sample stimulus was presented at one location followed by a brief test stimulus at that (relevant) location and a distractor at another (irrelevant) location. While maintaining fixation, the monkey indicated whether the sample and the test stimulus matched, ignoring the distractor. The relevant and irrelevant locations were switched from trial to trial. Cells in the superficial layers of SC gave enhanced responses when the attended test stimulus was inside the receptive field compared with when the (physically identical) distractor was inside the field. These effects were found only in an “automatic” attentional cueing paradigm, in which a peripheral stimulus explicitly cued the animal as to the relevant location in the receptive field. No attentional effects were found with block of trials. The transient enhancement to the attended stimulus was observed at the onset and not at the offset of the stimulus. Electrical stimulation at the site corresponding to the irrelevant distractor location in the SC causes it to gain control over attention, causing impaired performance of the task at the relevant location. Stimulation at unattended sites without the presence of a distractor stimulus causes little or no impairment in performance. The effect of stimulation decays with successive stimulations. The animals learn to ignore the stimulation unless the parameters of the task are varied.

To investigate the subcortical efferent connections of visual area V2, we injected tritiated amino acids under electrophysiological control into 15 V2 sites in 14 macaques. The injection sites included the fovea representation as well as representations ranging from central to far peripheral eccentricities in both the upper and lower visual fields. The results indicated that V2 projects topographically to different portions of the inferior and lateral pulvinar and to the superficial and intermediate layers of the superior colliculus. Within the pulvinar, the V2 projections terminated in fields P1, P2, and P4, with the strongest projection being in P2. Central visual field injections in V2 labeled projection zones in P1 and P2, whereas peripheral field injections labeled P1, P2, and P4. No projections were found in P3. Both central and peripheral field injections in V2 projected topographically to the superficial and intermediate layers of the superior colliculus. Projections from V2 to the pulvinar and the superior colliculus constituted cortical–subcortical loops through which circuits serving spatial attention are activated.

The notion of a neuron that responds selectively to the image of a particular complex object has been controversial ever since Gross and his colleagues reported neurons in the temporal cortex of monkeys that were selective for the sight of a monkey's hand (Gross, Rocha-Miranda, & Bender, 1972). Since that time, evidence has mounted for neurons in the temporal lobe that respond selectively to faces. The present paper presents a critical analysis of the evidence for face neurons and discusses the implications of these neurons for models of object recognition. The paper also presents some possible reasons for the evolution of face neurons and suggests some analogies with the development of language in humans.