Conscious but not thinking—Mind‐blanks during visuomotor tracking: An fMRI study of endogenous attention lapses

Abstract

AbstractAttention lapses (ALs) are complete lapses of responsiveness in which performance is briefly but completely disrupted and during which, as opposed to microsleeps, the eyes remain open. Although the phenomenon of ALs has been investigated by behavioural and physiological means, the underlying cause of an AL has largely remained elusive. This study aimed to investigate the underlying physiological substrates of behaviourally identified endogenous ALs during a continuous visuomotor task, primarily to answer the question: Were the ALs during this task due to extreme mind‐wandering or mind‐blanks? The data from two studies were combined, resulting in data from 40 healthy non‐sleep‐deprived subjects (20M/20F; mean age 27.1 years, 20–45). Only 17 of the 40 subjects were used in the analysis due to a need for a minimum of two ALs per subject. Subjects performed a random 2‐D continuous visuomotor tracking task for 50 and 20 min in Studies 1 and 2, respectively. Tracking performance, eye‐video, and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) were recorded simultaneously. A human expert visually inspected the tracking performance and eye‐video recordings to identify and categorise lapses of responsiveness as microsleeps or ALs. Changes in neural activity during 85 ALs (17 subjects) relative to responsive tracking were estimated by whole‐brain voxel‐wise fMRI and by haemodynamic response (HR) analysis in regions of interest (ROIs) from seven key networks to reveal the neural signature of ALs. Changes in functional connectivity (FC) within and between the key ROIs were also estimated. Networks explored were the default mode network, dorsal attention network, frontoparietal network, sensorimotor network, salience network, visual network, and working memory network. Voxel‐wise analysis revealed a significant increase in blood‐oxygen‐level‐dependent activity in the overlapping dorsal anterior cingulate cortex and supplementary motor area region but no significant decreases in activity; the increased activity is considered to represent a recovery‐of‐responsiveness process following an AL. This increased activity was also seen in the HR of the corresponding ROI. Importantly, HR analysis revealed no trend of increased activity in the posterior cingulate of the default mode network, which has been repeatedly demonstrated to be a strong biomarker of mind‐wandering. FC analysis showed decoupling of external attention, which supports the involuntary nature of ALs, in addition to the neural recovery processes. Other findings were a decrease in HR in the frontoparietal network before the onset of ALs, and a decrease in FC between default mode network and working memory network. These findings converge to our conclusion that the ALs observed during our task were involuntary mind‐blanks. This is further supported behaviourally by the short duration of the ALs (mean 1.7 s), which is considered too brief to be instances of extreme mind‐wandering. This is the first study to demonstrate that at least the majority of complete losses of responsiveness on a continuous visuomotor task are, if not due to microsleeps, due to involuntary mind‐blanks.