ArticleFrontiers in psychology2012
The Role of Competitive Inhibition and Top-Down Feedback in Binding during Object Recognition.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perceiving surface reflectance requires attention.Journal of vision · 2026Article
- Explicit Categorization Goals Affect Attention-Related Processing of Race and Gender During Person Construal.Journal of experimental social psychology · 2019Article
- Review
- A Neural Mechanism of Social Categorization.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2017Article
- Opposing effects of glutamatergic and GABAergic pharmacological manipulations on a visual perception task with relevance to schizophrenia.Psychopharmacology · 2015Article
- A conceptual framework of computations in mid-level vision.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2014Article
- Early recurrent feedback facilitates visual object recognition under challenging conditions.Frontiers in psychology · 2014Article
- Cognitive unbinding: a neuroscientific paradigm of general anesthesia and related states of unconsciousness.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2013Review
- Recurrent Processing during Object Recognition.Frontiers in psychology · 2013Article
- The process of feature binding.Frontiers in psychology · 2013Article
- Article
- Article
- The Time-Course of Ultrarapid Categorization: The Influence of Scene Congruency and Top-Down Processing.i-PerceptionArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
How does the brain bind together visual features that are processed concurrently by different neurons into a unified percept suitable for processes such as object recognition? Here, we describe how simple, commonly accepted principles of neural processing can interact over time to solve the brain's binding problem. We focus on mechanisms of neural inhibition and top-down feedback. Specifically, we describe how inhibition creates competition among neural populations that code different features, effectively suppressing irrelevant information, and thus minimizing illusory conjunctions. Top-down feedback contributes to binding in a similar manner, but by reinforcing relevant features. Together, inhibition and top-down feedback contribute to a competitive environment that ensures only the most appropriate features are bound together. We demonstrate this overall proposal using a biologically realistic neural model of vision that processes features across a hierarchy of interconnected brain areas. Finally, we argue that temporal synchrony plays only a limited role in binding - it does not simultaneously bind multiple objects, but does aid in creating additional contrast between relevant and irrelevant features. Thus, our overall theory constitutes a solution to the binding problem that relies only on simple neural principles without any binding-specific processes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.