Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30322902›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2018

Visual Evidence Accumulation Guides Decision-Making in Unrestrained Mice.

Onyekachi Odoemene, Sashank Pisupati, Hien Nguyen, Anne K Churchland

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed
6.4field-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

57 citing papers in PubMed, 107 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Target an arbitrary probability of response using weighted staircase procedures.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Onyekachi OdoemeneWatson School of Biological Sciences and.
Sashank PisupatiWatson School of Biological Sciences and.ORCID 0000-0003-0923-0585
Hien NguyenCold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, New York 11724.
Anne K ChurchlandCold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, New York 11724 churchland@cshl.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-3205-3794
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory · US

Funding

The role of parietal cortex in multisensory decision-makingR01EY022979 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI ANNE KATHRYN CHURCHLAND · 2013 to 2026
$5.7M
CSHL Watson School of Biological SciencesT32GM065094 · NIGMS · COLD SPRING HARBOR LABORATORY · PI GANN, ALEXANDER · 2002 to 2021
$4.8M
THE ROLE OF CORTICAL INHIBITORY NEURONS IN VISUAL DECISION-MAKINGF31EY025164 · NEI · COLD SPRING HARBOR LABORATORY · PI ODOEMENE, ONYEKACHI · 2015 to 2016
$79k
NEI NIH HHS F31 EY025164NEI NIH HHS R01 EY022979NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM065094
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ability to manipulate neural activity with precision is an asset in uncovering neural circuits for decision-making. Diverse tools for manipulating neurons are available for mice, but their feasibility remains unclear, especially when decisions require accumulating visual evidence. For example, whether mice' decisions reflect leaky accumulation is unknown, as are the relevant/irrelevant factors that influence decisions. Further, causal circuits for visual evidence accumulation are poorly understood. To address this, we measured decisions in mice judging the fluctuating rate of a flash sequence. An initial analysis (>500,000 trials, 29 male and female mice) demonstrated that information throughout the 1000 ms trial influenced choice, with early information most influential. This suggests that information persists in neural circuits for ∼1000 ms with minimal accumulation leak. Next, in a subset of animals, we probed strategy more extensively and found that although animals were influenced by stimulus rate, they were unable to entirely suppress the influence of stimulus brightness. Finally, we identified anteromedial (AM) visual area via retinotopic mapping and optogenetically inhibited it using JAWS. Light activation biased choices in both injected and uninjected animals, demonstrating that light alone influences behavior. By varying stimulus-response contingency while holding stimulated hemisphere constant, we surmounted this obstacle to demonstrate that AM suppression biases decisions. By leveraging a large dataset to quantitatively characterize decision-making behavior, we establish mice as suitable for neural circuit manipulation studies. Further, by demonstrating that mice accumulate visual evidence, we demonstrate that this strategy for reducing uncertainty in decision-making is used by animals with diverse visual systems.

Indexed as

AnimalsDecision MakingFemaleMaleMiceMice, Inbred C57BLMice, TransgenicPhotic StimulationRatsRats, Long-EvansReaction TimeVisual CortexVisual Perceptiondecision-making

Identifiers

PMID30322902
PMCPMC6246883
OpenAlexW2896350232

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.