ArticleCommunications biology2025
An anti-Hebbian model for binocular visual plasticity and its attentional modulation.
Article in Communications biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Orientation-Specific Inhibitory Plasticity in Binocular Rivalry.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2026Article
- Visually guided voluntary actions boost short-term ocular dominance plasticity.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Refractive and visual changes in the fellow eye after unilateral refractive surgery in patients with anisometropia.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Breaking and restoring ocular balance: Temporal interactions in binocular rivalry and stereopsis.Journal of vision · 2025Article
- Ocular Dominance Plasticity: A Mini-Review.Eye and brain · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Monocular deprivation during the critical period impairs the cortical structure and visual function of the deprived eye. Conversely, transient occlusion of one eye in adults enhances the predominance of that eye. This counter-intuitive effect of short-term monocular deprivation is a form of homeostatic plasticity. However, whether this sensory plasticity requires attention, and the underlying neural mechanisms remain unclear. Here, through a psychophysical experiment, we demonstrate that the deprivation effect is dramatically attenuated in the absence of attention. We develop a neural computational model incorporating the Hebbian learning rule in interocular inhibitory synapses (i.e., anti-Hebbian learning) to explain the deprivation effect. Our model predicts both the boosting of the deprived eye and its dependence on attention. Moreover, it accounts for other forms of binocular plasticity, including plasticity observed in prolonged binocular rivalry. We suggest that short-term binocular plasticity arises from the plasticity in inhibitory connections between the two monocular pathways.
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.