Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29456140›Full record

ArticleCurrent biology : CB2018

Visual Selective Attention in Mice.

Lupeng Wang, Richard J Krauzlis

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current biology : CB, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

51 citing papers in PubMed, 118 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Neuronal Features of Visual Attention in the Mouse Superior Colliculus Depend on Learned Behavioral Relevance.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Towards a neuroethological approach to consciousness.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Highly selective visual receptive fields in mouse frontal cortex.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Common and distinct neural mechanisms of attention.Trends in cognitive sciences · 2024
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Costs and benefits of voluntary attention in crows.Royal Society open science · 2023
    Article
  19. Deviance Distraction and Stimulus-Specific Adaptation in the Somatosensory Cortex Reduce with Experience.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2023
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lupeng WangLaboratory of Sensorimotor Research, National Eye Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892-4435, USA.
Richard J KrauzlisLaboratory of Sensorimotor Research, National Eye Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892-4435, USA. Electronic address: richard.krauzlis@nih.gov.
National Eye Institute · US

Funding

Visual CircuitsZIAEY000511 · NEI · NATIONAL EYE INSTITUTE · PI KRAUZLIS, RICHARD · 2012 to 2025
$28.3M
Intramural NIH HHS Z99 EY999999Intramural NIH HHS ZIA EY000511
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Visual selective attention is a fundamental cognitive ability that allows us to process relevant visual stimuli while ignoring irrelevant distracters and has been extensively studied in human and non-human primate subjects. Mice have emerged as a powerful animal model for studying aspects of the visual system but have not yet been shown to exhibit visual selective attention. Differences in the organization of the visual systems of primates and mice raise the possibility that selective visual attention might not be present in mice, at least not in the forms that are well established in primates. Here, we tested for selective visual attention in mice by using three behavioral paradigms adapted from classic studies of attention. In a Posner-style cueing task, a spatial cue indicated the probable location of the relevant visual event, and we found that accuracy was higher and reaction times were shorter on validly cued trials. In a cue versus no-cue task, an informative spatial cue was provided on half the trials, and mice had higher accuracy and shorter reaction times with spatial cues and also lower detection thresholds measured from psychometric curves. In a filter task, the spatial cue indicated the location of the relevant visual event, and we found that mice could be trained to ignore irrelevant but otherwise identical visual events at uncued locations. Together, these results demonstrate that mice exhibit visual selective attention, paving the way to use classic attention paradigms in mice to study the genetic and neuronal circuit mechanisms of selective attention.

Indexed as

CuesAnimalsAttentionFemaleMaleMiceMice, Inbred C57BLVisual Perceptionattentiondetectionmicemouseperceptionpsychophysicsvisual

Identifiers

PMID29456140
PMCPMC5914527
OpenAlexW2786021504

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.