Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37155704›Full record

ArticlePLoS biology2023

Feedback information transfer in the human brain reflects bistable perception in the absence of report.

Andres Canales-Johnson, Lola Beerendonk, Srivas Chennu, Matthew J Davidson, Robin A A Ince, Simon van Gaal

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
5.5field-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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Broadband synergy versus oscillatory redundancy in the visual cortex.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  8. Predictive encoding of auditory sequences in the human prefrontal cortex.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

6 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Andres Canales-JohnsonConscious Brain Lab, Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2747-8894
Lola BeerendonkConscious Brain Lab, Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Srivas ChennuSchool of Computing, University of Kent, Canterbury, United Kingdom.
Matthew J DavidsonSchool of Psychology, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Robin A A InceInstitute of Neuroscience and Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Simon van GaalConscious Brain Lab, Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
University of Amsterdam · NLThe University of Sydney · AUUniversity of Cambridge · GBUniversity of Glasgow · GBUniversity of Kent · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the search for the neural basis of conscious experience, perception and the cognitive processes associated with reporting perception are typically confounded as neural activity is recorded while participants explicitly report what they experience. Here, we present a novel way to disentangle perception from report using eye movement analysis techniques based on convolutional neural networks and neurodynamical analyses based on information theory. We use a bistable visual stimulus that instantiates two well-known properties of conscious perception: integration and differentiation. At any given moment, observers either perceive the stimulus as one integrated unitary object or as two differentiated objects that are clearly distinct from each other. Using electroencephalography, we show that measures of integration and differentiation based on information theory closely follow participants' perceptual experience of those contents when switches were reported. We observed increased information integration between anterior to posterior electrodes (front to back) prior to a switch to the integrated percept, and higher information differentiation of anterior signals leading up to reporting the differentiated percept. Crucially, information integration was closely linked to perception and even observed in a no-report condition when perceptual transitions were inferred from eye movements alone. In contrast, the link between neural differentiation and perception was observed solely in the active report condition. Our results, therefore, suggest that perception and the processes associated with report require distinct amounts of anterior-posterior network communication and anterior information differentiation. While front-to-back directed information is associated with changes in the content of perception when viewing bistable visual stimuli, regardless of report, frontal information differentiation was absent in the no-report condition and therefore is not directly linked to perception per se.

Indexed as

BrainElectroencephalographyEye MovementsFeedbackHumansPerceptionPhotic StimulationVisual Perception

Identifiers

PMID37155704
PMCPMC10194963
OpenAlexW4375955973

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.