ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2012
Attention selects informative neural populations in human V1.
Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sensorimotor dynamics of target acquisition and homing in human echolocation.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Attention Alters Population Spatial Frequency Tuning.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- Quantifying population-level neural tuning functions using Ricker wavelets and the Bayesian bootstrap.Journal of neuroscience methods · 2025Article
- Division and spreading of attention across color.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2024Article
- Quantifying Population-level Neural Tuning Functions Using Ricker Wavelets and the Bayesian Bootstrap.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Estimating neural activity from visual areas using functionally defined EEG templates.Human brain mapping · 2023Article
- Spatial and Feature-selective Attention Have Distinct, Interacting Effects on Population-level Tuning.Journal of cognitive neuroscience · 2022Article
- Scalp-recorded N40 visual evoked potential: Sensory and attentional properties.The European journal of neuroscience · 2021Article
- Steady-State Visually Evoked Potentials and Feature-based Attention: Preregistered Null Results and a Focused Review of Methodological Considerations.Journal of cognitive neuroscience · 2021Review
- Control of visual adaptation depends upon task.PloS one · 2020Article
- Functional MRI and EEG Index Complementary Attentional Modulations.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2019Article
- Optimality and heuristics in perceptual neuroscience.Nature neuroscience · 2019Review
- Endogenously generated gamma-band oscillations in early visual cortex: A neurofeedback study.Human brain mapping · 2018Article
- The Effect of Locomotion on Early Visual Contrast Processing in Humans.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2018Article
- Attention Modifies Spatial Resolution According to Task Demands.Psychological science · 2017Article
- Steady-state visual evoked potentials as a research tool in social affective neuroscience.Psychophysiology · 2016Review
- Degraded attentional modulation of cortical neural populations in strabismic amblyopia.Journal of vision · 2016Article
- How to use fMRI functional localizers to improve EEG/MEG source estimation.Journal of neuroscience methods · 2015Review
- A review of the mechanisms by which attentional feedback shapes visual selectivity.Brain structure & function · 2015Review
- The steady-state visual evoked potential in vision research: A review.Journal of vision · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
In a neural population driven by a simple grating stimulus, different subpopulations are maximally informative about changes to the grating's orientation and contrast. In theory, observers should attend to the optimal subpopulation when switching between orientation and contrast discrimination tasks. Here we used source-imaged, steady-state visual evoked potentials and visual psychophysics to determine whether this is the case. Observers fixated centrally while static targets were presented bilaterally along with a cue indicating task type (contrast or orientation modulation detection) and task location (left or right). Changes in neuronal activity were measured by quantifying frequency-tagged responses from flickering "reporter" gratings surrounding the targets. To determine the orientation tuning of attentionally modulated neurons, we measured responses for three different probe-reporter angles: 0, 20, and 45°. We estimated frequency-tagged cortical activity using a minimum norm inverse procedure combined with realistic MR-derived head models and retinotopically mapped visual areas. Estimates of neural activity from regions of interest centered on V1 showed that attention to a spatial location clearly increased the amplitude of the neural response in that location. More importantly, the pattern of modulation depended on the task. For orientation discrimination, attentional modulation showed a sharp peak in the population tuned 20° from the target orientation, whereas for contrast discrimination the enhancement was more broadly tuned. Similar tuning functions for orientation and contrast discrimination were obtained from psychophysical adaptation studies. These findings indicate that humans attend selectively to the most informative neural population and that these populations change depending on the nature of the task.
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.