ArticlePLoS computational biology2018
Linking signal detection theory and encoding models to reveal independent neural representations from neuroimaging data.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Leveraging Psychophysics to Infer the Mechanisms of Encoding Change in Vision.Computational brain & behavior · 2025Article
- The sequential categorization-identification paradigm (SCIP): A paradigm for the concurrent testing of strong hypotheses regarding psychological representation and processing.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2025Article
- Face shape and motion are perceptually separable: Support for a revised model of face processing.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2024Article
- Improving the validity of neuroimaging decoding tests of invariant and configural neural representation.PLoS computational biology · 2023Article
- A computational account of the mechanisms underlying face perception biases in depression.Journal of abnormal psychology · 2021Article
- Multivoxel codes for representing and integrating acoustic features in human cortex.NeuroImage · 2020Article
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
Many research questions in visual perception involve determining whether stimulus properties are represented and processed independently. In visual neuroscience, there is great interest in determining whether important object dimensions are represented independently in the brain. For example, theories of face recognition have proposed either completely or partially independent processing of identity and emotional expression. Unfortunately, most previous research has only vaguely defined what is meant by "independence," which hinders its precise quantification and testing. This article develops a new quantitative framework that links signal detection theory from psychophysics and encoding models from computational neuroscience, focusing on a special form of independence defined in the psychophysics literature: perceptual separability. The new theory allowed us, for the first time, to precisely define separability of neural representations and to theoretically link behavioral and brain measures of separability. The framework formally specifies the relation between these different levels of perceptual and brain representation, providing the tools for a truly integrative research approach. In particular, the theory identifies exactly what valid inferences can be made about independent encoding of stimulus dimensions from the results of multivariate analyses of neuroimaging data and psychophysical studies. In addition, commonly used operational tests of independence are re-interpreted within this new theoretical framework, providing insights on their correct use and interpretation. Finally, we apply this new framework to the study of separability of brain representations of face identity and emotional expression (neutral/sad) in a human fMRI study with male and female participants.
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.