ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2026
Reassessing Choice Probability: What 59 Macaque Studies Tell Us About Decision-Related Activity in Visual Cortex.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Choice probability (CP) quantifies the trial-by-trial covariation between a sensory neuron's response and perceptual reports. Despite extensive interest in CP as a window into how perception is linked to the activity of sensory neurons, the usefulness of CP remains debated. On one hand, reported CP magnitudes vary widely across seemingly equivalent studies, questioning its utility as a metric. On the other hand, the absence of clear patterns in CP variability has made it difficult to use it to adjudicate between competing models of visual perception. Here, we performed a meta-analysis of 150 CP estimates from 59 macaque neurophysiology studies to identify factors that systematically influence CP. We confirmed the positive relationship between CP and neuronal sensitivity both across and within individual studies. When controlled for sensitivity, we found remarkable consistency in CP across varying tasks and brain regions with two notable exceptions. First, CPs were higher in tasks involving bistable percepts, reinforcing the link between CP magnitude and subjective perception. Second, CPs were smaller in area V1, supporting prior suggestions about V1's special role in visual processing. We further found a significant effect of stimulus duration on CP, providing evidence against strictly feedforward models and favoring models with substantial feedback and recurrent processing. Finally, we offer recommendations for future studies to enhance the cross-study comparability and theoretical utility of choice signals as the field transitions to large-scale population recordings. More broadly, our findings demonstrate the benefits of meta-studies that expose patterns across many different tasks and animals - yielding insights that complement large-scale population recordings.
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.