Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26226854›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of physiology2015

Ultrafast initiation of a neural race by impending errors.

Imran Noorani, R H S Carpenter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of physiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Towards a unifying mechanism for cancelling movements.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2017
    Review
  4. Cortical control and performance monitoring of interrupting and redirecting movements.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2017
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Imran NooraniDepartment of Physiology, Development and Neuroscience, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
R H S CarpenterDepartment of Physiology, Development and Neuroscience, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

key pointsThe brain makes decisions by means of races between neural units representing alternative choices. In the present study, we record the eyemovements made in the Wheeless task, when a visual stimulus is followed after a short delay by another stimulus demanding a different response. The behaviour can be very precisely described as a race between three independent decision processes: one Go process for each of the responses, and a Stop process that tries to cancel the first, now erroneous, response. To explain the high success rate for cancellation that we observe, the onset time for the Stop process must be some 10-20 ms shorter than for Go. As well as extending our understanding of the dynamics of complex decision-making, this task provides a rapid, non-invasive method for quantifying disorders of higher neural function. ABSTRACT: The brain makes decisions by means of races between neural units representing alternative choices, and such models can predict behaviour in decision tasks in a precisely quantitative way. But what is less clear is how soon after the stimulus the race actually starts. In the present study, we re-visit a complex decision experiment: the Wheeless task, in which a saccadic stimulus is followed after a short delay by a second stimulus, with the subject sometimes making a saccade to the first, now inappropriate, stimulus, and sometimes going straight to the correct one. We demonstrate that a simple model with three accumulator units, two 'Go' and one 'Stop', can then account in detail for the individual responses made, as well as their timing. This complex decision-making behaviour is predicted directly for each individual subject by their performance in a simple step saccadic task, which identifies the two free parameters that are specific for each subject. By contrast to previous assumptions, we find that it is necessary for the onset time of the Stop unit to be shorter than for Go by 10-20 ms. This suggests a specifically fast mechanism for altering responses in situations where urgent action is needed to prevent an impending error.

Indexed as

AdultFemaleHumansMalePhotic StimulationPsychomotor PerformanceReaction TimeSaccadesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID26226854
PMCPMC4594249

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.