ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2013
Effects of task and attentional selection on responses in human visual cortex.
Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Attention Modulates Stimulus Representations in Neural Feature Dimension Maps.Journal of cognitive neuroscience · 2025Article
- Learned feature regularities enable suppression of spatially overlapping stimuli.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2023Article
- Prospective motion correction improves the sensitivity of fMRI pattern decoding.Human brain mapping · 2018Article
- The causal relationship between dyslexia and motion perception reconsidered.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Evidence for unlimited capacity processing of simple features in visual cortex.Journal of vision · 2017Article
- Distinct effects of trial-driven and task Set-related control in primary visual cortex.NeuroImage · 2015Article
- Task context impacts visual object processing differentially across the cortex.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2014Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Multiple visual tasks can be performed on the same visual input, with different tasks presumably engaging different neuronal populations. The modular layout of the visual system implies that specific cortical regions carry more information about certain stimulus attributes than others. Thus it is reasonable to assume that decisions during a task will be optimal if they are based on the responses of the most informative neuronal signals, which presumably originate in regions with the sharpest tuning for the relevant stimulus feature. Previous studies have supported this position. Here we present the results of two fMRI experiments that confirm these findings and expand on earlier investigations by addressing the effects of the physical properties of an attended stimulus on task-related modulations in human visual cortex. Specifically, we ask whether performing two-alternative forced choice speed- and color-discrimination tasks (and other attentional processes) can modulate neural activity independent of visual stimulation and whether the effect of spatial attention depends on which task is being performed. The results indicate that 1) when stimulation and spatial attention are constant, responses in V4 and MT+ depend on the task being performed and are independent of the tested physical properties of the selected stimulus, 2) this task-dependent modulation might require a stimulus--task-specific preparatory mechanisms alone are not sufficient to drive responses, and 3) independent of which task is being performed, spatial attention adds a baseline shift to responses in MT+ and V4 when a stimulus is present.
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.