ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2016
Distinct fMRI Responses to Self-Induced versus Stimulus Motion during Free Viewing in the Macaque.
Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Translating functional brain activity between humans and monkeys.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Monkeys engage in visual simulation to solve complex problems.Current biology : CB · 2024Article
- Semantic novelty modulates neural responses to visual change across the human brain.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Article
- Parallel functional subnetworks embedded in the macaque face patch system.Science advances · 2022Article
- The Importance of Accounting for Movement When Relating Neuronal Activity to Sensory and Cognitive Processes.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2022Article
- Article
- Neural responses to natural visual motion are spatially selective across the visual field, with selectivity differing across brain areas and task.The European journal of neuroscience · 2021Article
- Common functional localizers to enhance NHP & cross-species neuroscience imaging research.NeuroImage · 2021Article
- Neurons in primate prefrontal cortex signal valuable social information during natural viewing.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021Article
- Studying the visual brain in its natural rhythm.NeuroImage · 2020Review
- atlasBREX: Automated template-derived brain extraction in animal MRI.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Functional Subpopulations of Neurons in a Macaque Face Patch Revealed by Single-Unit fMRI Mapping.Neuron · 2017Article
- Human Neurophysiology: Sampling the Perceptual World.Current biology : CB · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
unlabelledVisual motion responses in the brain are shaped by two distinct sources: the physical movement of objects in the environment and motion resulting from one's own actions. The latter source, termed visual reafference, stems from movements of the head and body, and in primates from the frequent saccadic eye movements that mark natural vision. To study the relative contribution of reafferent and stimulus motion during natural vision, we measured fMRI activity in the brains of two macaques as they freely viewed >50 hours of naturalistic video footage depicting dynamic social interactions. We used eye movements obtained during scanning to estimate the level of reafferent retinal motion at each moment in time. We also estimated the net stimulus motion by analyzing the video content during the same time periods. Mapping the responses to these distinct sources of retinal motion, we found a striking dissociation in the distribution of visual responses throughout the brain. Reafferent motion drove fMRI activity in the early retinotopic areas V1, V2, V3, and V4, particularly in their central visual field representations, as well as lateral aspects of the caudal inferotemporal cortex (area TEO). However, stimulus motion dominated fMRI responses in the superior temporal sulcus, including areas MT, MST, and FST as well as more rostral areas. We discuss this pronounced separation of motion processing in the context of natural vision, saccadic suppression, and the brain's utilization of corollary discharge signals. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Visual motion arises not only from events in the external world, but also from the movements of the observer. For example, even if objects are stationary in the world, the act of walking through a room or shifting one's eyes causes motion on the retina. This "reafferent" motion propagates into the brain as signals that must be interpreted in the context of real object motion. The delineation of whole-brain responses to stimulus versus self-generated retinal motion signals is critical for understanding visual perception and is of pragmatic importance given the increasing use of naturalistic viewing paradigms. The present study uses fMRI to demonstrate that the brain exhibits a fundamentally different pattern of responses to these two sources of retinal motion.
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.