Why is “blindsight” blind? A new perspective on primary visual cortex, recurrent activity and visual awareness

The neuropsychological phenomenon of blindsight has been taken to suggest that the primary visual cortex (V1) plays a unique role in visual awareness, and that extrastriate activation needs to be fed back to V1 in order for the content of that activation to be consciously perceived. The aim of this review is to evaluate this theoretical framework and to revisit its key tenets. Firstly, is blindsight truly a dissociation of awareness and visual detection? Secondly, is there sufficient evidence to rule out the possibility that the loss of awareness resulting from a V1 lesion simply reflects reduced extrastriate responsiveness, rather than a unique role of V1 in conscious experience? Evaluation of these arguments and the empirical evidence leads to the conclusion that the loss of phenomenal awareness in blindsight may not be due to feedback activity in V1 being the hallmark awareness. On the basis of existing literature, an alternative explanation of blindsight is proposed. In this view, visual awareness is a “global” cognitive function as its hallmark is the availability of information to a large number of perceptual and cognitive systems; this requires inter-areal long-range synchronous oscillatory activity. For these oscillations to arise, a specific temporal profile of neuronal activity is required, which is established through recurrent feedback activity involving V1 and the extrastriate cortex. When V1 is lesioned, the loss of recurrent activity prevents inter-areal networks on the basis of oscillatory activity. However, as limited amount of input can reach extrastriate cortex and some extrastriate neuronal selectivity is preserved, computations involving comparison of neural firing rates within a cortical area remain possible. This enables “local” read-out from specific brain regions, allowing for the detection and discrimination of basic visual attributes. Thus blindsight is blind due to lack of “global” long-range synchrony, and it functions via “local” neural readout from extrastriate areas.

Who gets to play? Investigating equity in musical instrument instruction in Scottish primary schools

There is a widely held view that learning to play a musical instrument is a valuable experience for all children in terms of their personal growth and development. Although there is no statutory obligation for instrumental music provision in Scottish primary schools, there are well-established Instrumental Music Services in Local Education Authorities that have been developed to provide this facility for pupils. This article presents the findings of a study that was aimed at investigating the extent to which the opportunity to undertake instrumental instruction in Scottish primary schools is equitable. The study employed a mixed-methods approach. Data were gathered from 21 Scottish primary schools, a total pupil population of 5122 pupils of whom 323 pupils were receiving instrumental instruction. The analysis involved an investigation of the academic profile of this group, the representation of children with additional support needs (ASN) and the nature of their ASN. A qualitative analysis of policy and guideline documents and interviews with Heads of Instrumental Services, headteachers and instrumental instructors served to explain and illuminate the quantitative data. The findings showed that particular groups of children with ASN were significantly under-represented and offer explanations of the processes by which this occurs.

Physical Education or Playtime: which is more effective at promoting physical activity in primary school children?

Background School physical education (PE) and playtime provide important opportunities for physical activity (PA). However, little research has assessed PA during primary school PE using accelerometry or compared PA during different lesson types. There is also a lack of research comparing PA during PE and playtime, despite suggestions that playtime promotes more PA. The primary aim of this study was to determine which types of PE lesson are most facilitative of PA. The secondary aim was to determine whether children are more active during PE or playtime. Methods Descriptive and fitness data were assessed in 20 children aged 8-9years from a single school. Over eight consecutive weeks PA was assessed during PE lessons, which were classified as either team games or movement activities. At the mid-week of data collection playtime PA was also assessed. PA was assessed using accelerometry and the percentage of time spent in moderate to vigorous PA (MVPA) calculated. Paired t-tests were used to compare MVPA during movement lessons and team games lessons and during PE and playtime. Results Children spent 9.5% of PE lessons in MVPA and engaged in significantly more MVPA during team games (P < 0.001). MVPA was also significantly higher during PE than playtime (P < 0.01). Conclusions Children do not engage in sufficient PA during PE, but are most active during team games lessons; whilst PA during playtime is lower than PE. Interventions to increase PA during both PE and playtime are therefore required. PE interventions should target games lessons as they dominate the curriculum, encourage most PA and present the greatest potential for change. Playtime interventions should encourage participation in active games through the provision of playground equipment and markings.