Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36175303›Full record

ReviewTrends in cognitive sciences2022

Three aspects of representation in neuroscience.

Ben Baker, Benjamin Lansdell, Konrad P Kording

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Trends in cognitive sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. The role of fibration symmetries in geometric deep learning.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. The cognitive neuroscience of memory representations.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2025
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Connectivity analyses for task-based fMRI.Physics of life reviews · 2024
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Seeing social interactions.Trends in cognitive sciences · 2023
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. When Neural Activity Fails to Reveal Causal Contributions.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023
    Article
  17. The Representational Similarity between Visual Perception and Recent Perceptual History.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

3 authors.

Ben BakerDepartment of Neuroscience, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Electronic address: tbak@sas.upenn.edu.
Benjamin LansdellDepartment of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Konrad P KordingDepartment of Neuroscience, Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, CIFAR, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Funding

Quantifying causality for neuroscienceR01EB028162 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI KORDING, KONRAD P. · 2019 to 2019
$1.1M
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB028162
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neuroscientists often describe neural activity as a representation of something, or claim to have found evidence for a neural representation, but there is considerable ambiguity about what such claims entail. Here we develop a thorough account of what 'representation' does and should do for neuroscientists in terms of three key aspects of representation. (i) Correlation: a neural representation correlates to its represented content; (ii) causal role: the representation has a characteristic effect on behavior; and (iii) teleology: a goal or purpose served by the behavior and thus the representation. We draw broadly on literature in both neuroscience and philosophy to show how these three aspects are rooted in common approaches to understanding the brain and mind. We first describe different contexts that 'representation' has been closely linked to in neuroscience, then discuss each of the three aspects in detail.

Indexed as

NeurosciencesBrainEthical TheoryHumansPhilosophycodingexplanationfunctioninformationphilosophyrepresentationteleology

Identifiers

PMID36175303
PMCPMC11749295

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.