Cited by 131Visual perception and processing mechanismsFace Recognition and PerceptionMemory and Neural Mechanisms

Stimulus Repetition Probability Does Not Affect Repetition Suppression in Macaque Inferior Temporal Cortex

Kaliukhovich, Dzmitry A., Vogels, Rufin·2011·Cerebral Cortex

Abstract

Recent human functional magnetic resonance imaging studies (Summerfield C, Trittschuh EH, Monti JM, Mesulam MM, Egner T. 2008. Neural repetition suppression reflects fulfilled perceptual expectations. Nat Neurosci. 11:1004-1006.) showed that adaptation or repetition suppression is affected by contextual factors related to perceptual expectations, suggesting that adaptation results from a fulfillment of perceptual expectation or a reduction in prediction error. This view contrasts with the bottom-up fatigue or sharpening mechanisms of adaptation proposed in single-cell studies. We examined whether stimulus repetition probability affects adaptation of spiking activity and local field potentials (LFPs) in macaque inferior temporal (IT) cortex, using a protocol similar to that of Summerfield et al. Monkeys were exposed to 2 randomly interleaved trials, each consisting of either 2 identical (rep trial) or 2 different stimuli (alt trial). Trials were presented in repetition (rep) blocks consisting of 75% of rep trials and 25% of alt trials or in alternation (alt) blocks having opposite repetition probabilities. For both spiking and LFP activities, the stimulus-selective adaptation did not differ significantly between rep and alt blocks. The number of preceding rep or alt trials and the trial position within a block did not affect adaptation. This absence of any effect of stimulus repetition probability on adaptation suggests that adaptation in IT is not caused by contextual factors related to perceptual expectation.

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 · 10.1093/cercor/bhq207

Cites

45 of 45 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?

  • Kaliukhovich and Vogels reported responses to deviant stimuli indistinguishable from responses to infrequent but conditionally probable stimuli.

    “Attempting to replicate the findings of Summerfield et al. 57 with single‐cell recordings in macaque IT, Kaliukhovich and Vogels 71 reported that responses to deviant stimuli were indistinguishable from responses to infrequent, but conditionally probable, stimuli.”

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
Kaliukhovich, D. A., & Vogels, R.
Affiliations
KU Leuven (BE)
Venue
Cerebral Cortex
Published
2010-11-22
Volume
21
Issue
7
Pages
1547-1558
ISSN
  • 1047-3211 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2199
OpenAlex
W2117129339
Cited by
131
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 12
FWCI
6.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cerebral Cortex (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
repetition suppression, neural adaptation, inferior temporal cortex, perceptual expectations, prediction error, local field potentials, spiking activity, macaque
MeSH terms
Action Potentials, Adaptation, Physiological, Animals, Female, Macaca, Macaca mulatta, Male, Neural Inhibition, Photic Stimulation, Random Allocation, Temporal Lobe

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