Responses of pulvinar neurons reflect a subject's confidence in visual categorization
Abstract
When we recognize a sensory event, we experience a confident feeling that we certainly know the perceived world 'here and now'. However, it is unknown how and where the brain generates such 'perceptual confidence'. Here we found neural correlates of confidence in the primate pulvinar, a visual thalamic nucleus that has been expanding markedly through evolution. During a categorization task, the majority of pulvinar responses did not correlate with any 'perceptual content'. During an opt-out task, pulvinar responses decreased when monkeys chose 'escape' options, suggesting less confidence in their perceptual categorization. Functional silencing of the pulvinar increased monkeys' escape choices in the opt-out task without affecting categorization performance; this effect was specific to the contralateral visual target. These data were supported by a theoretical model of confidence, indicating that pulvinar activities encode a subject's certainty of visual categorization and contribute to perceptual confidence.
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?
A prominent proposal is that confidence is based on the distance between the measurement and the decision boundary, without any role for sensory uncertainty.
“a prominent proposal is that confidence is based on the distance between the measurement and the decision boundary, without any role for sensory uncertainty [10, 11, 39].”
From Comparing Bayesian and non-Bayesian accounts of human confidence reports (2018) · cites this paper as [10]
Deactivation of these pulvinar neurons by GABA agonist (muscimol) injection enhanced escape responses, as though the monkeys lost confidence in their perceptual decision even though their objective task performance was unimpaired.
“the deactivation of these neurons by GABA agonist (muscimol) injection enhanced escape responses—as though the monkeys lost confidence in their perceptual decision even though their objective task performance was unimpaired.”
From Cerebral hierarchies: predictive processing, precision and the pulvinar (2015) · cites this paper as [56]
During a perceptual decision task, the subset of pulvinar neurons sensitive to reliability does not selectively respond to the content of perception but exhibits a higher firing rate when monkeys behaved as though they were certain about their perceptual decision.
“During a perceptual decision task, this subset of neurons does not selectively respond to the content of perception, but exhibits a higher firing rate when the monkeys behaved as though they were certain about their perceptual decision.”
From Cerebral hierarchies: predictive processing, precision and the pulvinar (2015) · cites this paper as [56]
The firing rate of these pulvinar neurons was lower for more difficult trials.
“The firing rate was lower for more difficult trials”
From Cerebral hierarchies: predictive processing, precision and the pulvinar (2015) · cites this paper as [56]
Approximately 30% of neurons in the pulvinar are sensitive to the reliability of task-relevant sensory signals, representing the confidence in perceptual decisions.
“it has been recently reported that approximately 30% of neurons in the pulvinar are sensitive to the reliability of task-relevant sensory signals, representing the ‘confidence’ in perceptual decisions [56].”
From Cerebral hierarchies: predictive processing, precision and the pulvinar (2015) · cites this paper as [56]
When monkeys were given a choice to opt-out for a smaller reward, a lower firing rate of these pulvinar neurons predicted the escape response, even when the signal-to-noise ratio in the stimulus was identical.
“When the monkeys were given a choice to opt-out, for a smaller reward, a lower firing rate of these neurons predicted the escape response of the monkeys—even when the signal-to-noise ratio in the stimulus was identical.”
From Cerebral hierarchies: predictive processing, precision and the pulvinar (2015) · cites this paper as [56]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 52 · Cited by 226
- Authors
- Komura, Y., Nikkuni, A., Hirashima, N., Uetake, T., & Miyamoto, A.
- Affiliations
- National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (JP)
- Corresponding author
- Komura, Yutaka
- Venue
- Nature Neuroscience
- Published
- 2013-05-12
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 749-755
- ISSN
- 1097-6256 (ISSN-L)
- 1546-1726
- OpenAlex
- W1985368528
- Cited by
- 226
- References
- 52
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 4
- FWCI
- 8.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Nature Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (21683008)
- Precursory Research for Embryonic Science and Technology
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Multisensory perception and integration
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
- Keywords
- pulvinar, perceptual confidence, visual categorization, visual awareness, thalamus, decision-making, primate visual cortex
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Attention, Awareness, Decision Making, Electrodes, Implanted, Geniculate Bodies, Macaca, Male, Models, Neurological, Neurons, Neuropsychological Tests, Problem Solving, Visual Perception, Pulvinar
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
