CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 387Neural dynamics and brain functionTactile and Sensory InteractionsMotor Control and Adaptation

Neuronal correlates of decision-making in secondary somatosensory cortex

Romo, Ranulfo, Hernández, Adrián, Zainos, Antonio, Lemus, Luis, Brody, Carlos D.·2002·Nature Neuroscience
DOI 10.1038/nn950
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The ability to discriminate between two sequential stimuli requires evaluation of current sensory information in reference to stored information. Where and how does this evaluation occur? We trained monkeys to compare two mechanical vibrations applied sequentially to the fingertips and to report which of the two had the higher frequency. We recorded single neurons in secondary somatosensory cortex (S2) while the monkeys performed the task. During the first stimulus period, the firing rate of S2 neurons encoded the stimulus frequency. During the second stimulus period, however, some S2 neurons did not merely encode the stimulus frequency. The responses of these neurons were a function of both the remembered (first) and current (second) stimulus. Moreover, a few hundred milliseconds after the presentation of the second stimulus, these responses were correlated with the monkey's decision. This suggests that some S2 neurons may combine past and present sensory information for decision-making.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nn950

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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 observation provides evidence against two main alternatives to post-initiation processing: (1) change of decision based on recall and/or reconsideration of evidence acquired before initiation, and (2) a correction of an initial motor error perhaps owing to confusion about the stimulus-response mapping.

    “The observation provides evidence against two main alternatives to post-initiation processing: (1) change of decision based on recall and/or reconsideration of evidence acquired before initiation18, and (2) a correction of an initial motor error perhaps owing to confusion about the stimulus-response mapping12.”

    From Changes of mind in decision-making (2009) · cites this paper as [18]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Romo, R., Hernández, A., Zainos, A., Lemus, L., & Brody, C. D.
Affiliations
  • Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (MX)
  • Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory (US)
Corresponding author
Romo, Ranulfo
ORCID
Venue
Nature Neuroscience
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2002-09-30
Volume
5
Issue
11
Pages
1217-1225
ISSN
  • 1097-6256 (ISSN-L)
  • 1546-1726
DOI
10.1038/nn950
OpenAlex
W1986028388
Cited by
387
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 25
FWCI
6.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Nature Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Institutional Repository (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
Keywords
decision-making, secondary somatosensory cortex, single-unit recording
MeSH terms
Animals, Cognition, Decision Making, Discrimination Learning, Electrophysiology, Macaca mulatta, Neurons, Somatosensory Cortex, Touch, Vibration

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