ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2019
Dynamic Causal Modelling of Active Vision.
Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Near-infrared light-induced transcranial photobiomodulation enhances the visual pathway's function in healthy volunteers.Journal of biomedical optics · 2025Trial
- SPM-30 years and beyond.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2025Review
- An active inference account of stuttering behavior.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
- Self-regulation learning as active inference: dynamic causal modeling of an fMRI neurofeedback task.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- Revealing Whole-Brain Causality Networks During Guided Visual Searching.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
- Musicianship and melodic predictability enhance neural gain in auditory cortex during pitch deviance detection.Human brain mapping · 2021Article
- Binocular rivalry reveals an out-of-equilibrium neural dynamics suited for decision-making.eLife · 2021Article
- Inferring What to Do (And What Not to).Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In this paper, we draw from recent theoretical work on active perception, which suggests that the brain makes use of an internal (i.e., generative) model to make inferences about the causes of sensations. This view treats visual sensations as consequent on action (i.e., saccades) and implies that visual percepts must be actively constructed via a sequence of eye movements. Oculomotor control calls on a distributed set of brain sources that includes the dorsal and ventral frontoparietal (attention) networks. We argue that connections from the frontal eye fields to ventral parietal sources represent the mapping from "where", fixation location to information derived from "what" representations in the ventral visual stream. During scene construction, this mapping must be learned, putatively through changes in the effective connectivity of these synapses. Here, we test the hypothesis that the coupling between the dorsal frontal cortex and the right temporoparietal cortex is modulated during saccadic interrogation of a simple visual scene. Using dynamic causal modeling for magnetoencephalography with (male and female) human participants, we assess the evidence for changes in effective connectivity by comparing models that allow for this modulation with models that do not. We find strong evidence for modulation of connections between the two attention networks; namely, a disinhibition of the ventral network by its dorsal counterpart.
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.