Cited by 283Visual perception and processing mechanismsVisual Attention and Saliency DetectionNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

A source for feature-based attention in the prefrontal cortex

Open access
Bichot, Narcisse P., Heard, Matthew T., DeGennaro, Ellen M., Desimone, Robert·2015·Neuron

Abstract

In cluttered scenes, we can use feature-based attention to quickly locate a target object. To understand how feature attention is used to find and select objects for action, we focused on the ventral prearcuate (VPA) region of prefrontal cortex. In a visual search task, VPA cells responded selectively to search cues, maintained their feature selectivity throughout the delay and subsequent saccades, and discriminated the search target in their receptive fields with a time course earlier than in FEF or IT cortex. Inactivation of VPA impaired the animals' ability to find targets, and simultaneous recordings in FEF revealed that the effects of feature attention were eliminated while leaving the effects of spatial attention in FEF intact. Altogether, the results suggest that VPA neurons compute the locations of objects with the features sought and send this information to FEF to guide eye movements to those relevant stimuli.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuron.2015.10.001

Cites

66 of 66 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Attentional modulation in neural systems is frequently thought to arise from recurrent top-down connections, not from the parallel processing of concurrent inputs.

    “However, this attentional modulation is frequently thought to arise from recurrent top-down connections, not from the parallel processing of concurrent inputs (Noudoost et al. 2010, Bichot et al. 2015).”

    From Consciousness in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Science of Consciousness (2023) · cites this paper as Bichot et al. 2015

    The Discussion (page unavailable) proposes that FEF feedback to visual areas may account for some effects of feature-based attention, supporting a top-down account. But the Introduction also discusses feature-based enhancement predicted by parallel search models; the paper does not establish the claim’s exclusion of parallel processing of concurrent inputs. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Only recently has evidence emerged of a causal role of distinct sub-regions of PFC in feature-based selective attention.

    “Although there is a rich literature describing the modulation of neural activity during feature-based attention (e.g. [30]), only recently has evidence emerged of a causal role of distinct sub-regions of PFC in its control [31].”

    From Linking ADHD to the Neural Circuitry of Attention (2017) · cites this paper as [31]

  • Exogenous and endogenous attention mechanisms are combined in LIP, SC, and FEF to generate a saliency map.

    “It has been proposed that exogenous and endogenous attention mechanisms are combined in area LIP [34], the SC [35], and the FEF (e.g. [31]) to generate a saliency map [34].”

    From Linking ADHD to the Neural Circuitry of Attention (2017) · cites this paper as [31]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bichot, N. P., Heard, M. T., DeGennaro, E. M., & Desimone, R.
Affiliations
McGovern Institute for Brain Research (US)
Corresponding author
Bichot, Narcisse P.
Venue
Neuron
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-11
Volume
88
Issue
4
Pages
832-844
ISSN
0896-6273 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2183992914
Cited by
283
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 53 · 2018: 32 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 2
FWCI
11.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuron (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1317348)
  • University of Chicago
  • National Eye Institute (EY017921, R01EY017921)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
feature-based attention, prefrontal cortex, visual search, eye movements, spatial attention, frontal eye field, receptive fields, neural inactivation, object location, cluttered scenes
MeSH terms
Animals, Attention, Cues, Frontal Lobe, Macaca mulatta, Male, Neurons, Saccades, Temporal Lobe, Visual Perception, Prefrontal Cortex

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