CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 352Motor Control and AdaptationVisual perception and processing mechanismsNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Intention-related activity in the posterior parietal cortex: a review

Open access
Snyder, L.H, Batista, A.P, Andersen, R.A·2000·Vision Research
DOI 10.1016/s0042-6989(00)00052-3
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Over the last few years it is becoming increasingly apparent that an important role of the posterior parietal cortex is to process sensory information for the purpose of planning actions. We review studies showing that a large component of neural activity in area LIP is related to planning saccades and activity in a nearby parietal reach region (PRR) to reaches. This intention related activity dominates the delay period in delayed movement tasks, and also comprises a substantial component of the transient response. These findings, along with additional anatomical and physiological evidence, lends support to the idea that different cortical areas within the PPC represent plans for different actions. We also found strong modulation of activity when movement plans were changed without changes in the locus of attention. This result suggests that PPC, which has been postulated to play a role in shifting attention, may also play a role in changing movement intentions. Sensory related activity was also present in these tasks and may be related to the stimulus or to attention. These experiments show that there are intention and sensory related activities in the PPC consistent with its proposed role in sensory-motor transformations. These studies also show that care must be taken to measure intention-related signals and not assume that all task dependent modulation in the PPC reflects attention.

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/s0042-6989(00)00052-3

Cites

35 of 35 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?

  • The pragmatic anticipation of the action's effects is mapped from PPC onto premotor and motor regions to activate the corresponding motor programs.

    “The pragmatic anticipation of the action’s effects is mapped from PPC onto premotor and motor regions to activate the corresponding motor programs (Sirigu et al., 1996; Snyder et al., 2000).”

    From Impulsive action: emotional impulses and their control (2014) · cites this paper as Snyder et al., 2000

    The Introduction (page unavailable) says PPC represents intended movements and that the parietal reach region projects to dorsal premotor cortex. The Discussion (page unavailable) describes PPC plans as early and suggests they may be elaborated and executed at later motor stages. It does not establish that PPC anticipates an action’s effects or maps those anticipated effects to premotor and motor regions to activate specific motor programs. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The changes in sensory-driven LIP responses with training did not appear to reflect changes in other motor or motivational parameters known to modulate LIP activity.

    “The changes in sensory-driven LIP responses with training also did not appear to reflect changes in other motor (Fig. 5, middle) or motivational parameters (Fig. 5, right) known to modulate LIP activity21, 22.”

    From Neural correlates of perceptual learning in a sensory-motor, but not a sensory, cortical area (2008) · cites this paper as [22]

  • LIP plays a multitude of cognitive and sensory-motor roles.

    “LIP plays a multitude of cognitive and sensory-motor roles that could, in principle, change during training and account for the changes in LIP responses during motion viewing 20–22.”

    From Neural correlates of perceptual learning in a sensory-motor, but not a sensory, cortical area (2008) · cites this paper as [22]

  • These findings are difficult to explain in a purely visual framework that casts target selection as a disembodied bias term, and are puzzling in an action-based framework that asks whether parietal areas are involved in skeletal or ocular actions.

    “These findings are difficult to explain in a purely visual framework that casts target selection as a disembodied bias term (Fig. 1B). They are also puzzling in an action based framework that asks whether parietal areas are involved in skeletal or ocular actions (Snyder et al., 2000).”

    From Attention, learning, and the value of information (2012) · cites this paper as Snyder et al., 2000

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

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Asanuma, C., Andersen, R. A., & Cowan, W. M. (1985). Form of the divergent thalamocortical projections form the medial pulvinar to the caudal inferior parietal lobule and prefrontal cortex: a double- label retrograde fluorescent tracer study in macaque monkey. Journal of Comparati6e Neurology, 241, 357-381.
  2. Barash, S., Andersen, R. A., Bracewell, R. M., Fogassi, L., & Gnadt, J. (1991). Saccade-related activity in the lateral intraparietal area. I: Temporal properties. Journal of Neurophysiology, 66, 1095-1108.
  3. Batista, A. P., Snyder, L. H., Buneo, C. A., & Andersen, R. A. (1998). The parietal reach region (PRR) employs a predominantly retinal reference frame which updates across saccades, and encodes only the impending reach. Society of Neuroscience Abstracts (in press).
  4. Rizzollatti, G., Riggio, L., & Sheliga, B. M. (1994). Space and selective attention. In C. Umilta, & M. Moscovitch, Attention and perfor- mance XV (pp. 231 -265). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  5. Snyder, L. H., Batista, A., & Andersen, R. A. (1998). Change in plan activity without changing the focus of attention. Journal of Neuro- physiology (in press).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Snyder, L. H., Batista, A. P., & Andersen, R. A.
Affiliations
California Institute of Technology (US)
Corresponding author
Andersen, R.A
ORCID
Venue
Vision Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-06
Volume
40
Issue
10-12
Pages
1433-1441
ISSN
0042-6989 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/s0042-6989(00)00052-3
OpenAlex
W2041158559
Cited by
352
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 13
FWCI
10.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Vision Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • CaltechAUTHORS (California Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • California Institute of Technology
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Office of Naval Research
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
posterior parietal cortex, parietal reach region, saccade planning, reach planning, sensory-motor transformation, attention, movement intention, action planning
MeSH terms
Movement, Parietal Lobe, Saccades, Sensation

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