Neural processes underlying conscious perception: experimental findings and a global neuronal workspace framework
Abstract
One striking property of perception is that it can be achieved in two seemingly different ways: either consciously or non-consciously. What distinguishes these two types of processing at the neural level? So far, empirical findings suggest that conscious perception is associated with an increase in activity at the sensory level, the specific involvement of a fronto-parietal network and an increase in long-distance functional connectivity and synchrony within a broad network of areas. We interpret these data in the framework of the global neuronal workspace model which proposes that the neural basis of conscious access is a sudden self-amplifying process leading to a global brain-scale pattern of activity. In contradiction with several theories which assume that there is a continuum of perception, associated with a gradual change in the intensity of brain activation, the model predicts a sharp non-linear transition between non-conscious and conscious processing.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Higher levels of inter-region functional coordination can facilitate emergence of neural activity as conscious percepts.
“Higher levels of inter-region functional coordination can facilitate emergence of neural activity as conscious percepts.”
From Elevated functional connectivity along a corticostriatal loop and the mechanism of auditory/verbal hallucinations in patients with schizophrenia (2011) · cites this paper as [11]
Network coordination facilitating perceptual processing, including speech comprehension, has been detected as elevated FC.
“Network coordination facilitating perceptual processing, including speech comprehension, has been detected as elevated FC (17,20,43–47).”
From Elevated functional connectivity along a corticostriatal loop and the mechanism of auditory/verbal hallucinations in patients with schizophrenia (2011) · cites this paper as [43]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 66 · Cited by 139
- Authors
- Sergent, C., & Dehaene, S.
- Affiliations
- Inserm (FR)
- Corresponding author
- Sergent, Claire
- Venue
- Journal of Physiology-Paris
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2004-07
- Volume
- 98
- Issue
- 4-6
- Pages
- 374-384
- ISSN
- 0928-4257 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2037358922
- Cited by
- 139
- References
- 66
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 9
- FWCI
- 0.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Physiology-Paris (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
- Keywords
- conscious perception, unconscious processes, frontoparietal network, neuronal synchronization, sensory activities
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Awareness, Brain Mapping, Cognition, Consciousness, Frontal Lobe, Humans, Models, Neurological, Nerve Net, Neurons, Afferent, Parietal Lobe, Time Factors, Visual Cortex, Visual Perception, Neural Networks, Computer
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review