Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 235

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Visual response properties of neurons in four extrastriate visual areas of the owl monkey (Aotus trivirgatus): a quantitative comparison of medial, dorsomedial, dorsolateral, and middle temporal areas

Baker, J. F., Petersen, S. E., Newsome, W. T., Allman, J. M.·1981·Journal of Neurophysiology

Abstract

1. The response properties of 354 single neurons in the medial (M), dorsomedial (DM), dorsolateral (DL), and middle temporal (MT) visual areas were studied quantitatively with bar, spot, and random-dot stimuli in chronically implanted owl monkeys with fixed gaze. 2. A directionality index was computed to compare the responses to stimuli in the optimal direction with the responses to the opposing direction of movement. The greater the difference between opposing directions, the higher the index. MT cells had much higher direction indices to moving bars than cells in DL, DM, and M. 3. A tuning index was computed for each cell to compare the responses to bars moving in the optimal direction, or flashed in the optimal orientation, with the responses in other directions or orientations within +/- 90 degrees. Cells in all four areas were more sharply tuned to the orientation of stationary flashed bars than to moving bars, although a few cells (9/92( were unresponsive in the absence of movement. DM cells tended to be more sharply tuned to moving bars than cells in the other areas. 4. Directionality in DM, DL, and MT was relatively unaffected by the use of single-spot stimuli instead of bars; tuning in all four areas was broader to spots than bars. 5. Moving arrays of randomly spaced spots were more strongly excitatory than bar stimuli for many neurons in MT (16/31 cells). These random-dot stimuli were also effective in M, but evoked no response or weak responses from most cells in DM and DL. 6. The best velocities of movement were usually in the range of 10-100 degrees/s, although a few cells (22/227), primarily in MT (14/69 cells), preferred higher velocities. 7. Receptive fields of neurons in all four areas were much larger than striate receptive fields. Eccentricity was positively correlated with receptive-field size (r = 0.62), but was not correlated with directionality index, tuning index, or best velocity. 8. The results support the hypothesis that there are specializations of function among the cortical visual areas.

Overview

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 · 10.1152/jn.1981.45.3.397

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cited by

See all 235

Metadata

Authors
Baker, J. F., Petersen, S. E., Newsome, W. T., & Allman, J. M.
Venue
Journal of Neurophysiology
Published
1981-03-01
Volume
45
Issue
3
Pages
397-416
ISSN
  • 0022-3077 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-1598
OpenAlex
W2187827657
Cited by
235
References
1
FWCI
3.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Visual response properties of neurons in four extrastriate visual areas of the owl monkey (Aotus trivirgatus): a quantitative comparison of medial, dorsomedial, dorsolateral, and middle temporal areas. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1152/jn.1981.45.3.397
The paper
Baker, J. F., Petersen, S. E., Newsome, W. T., & Allman, J. M. (1981). Visual response properties of neurons in four extrastriate visual areas of the owl monkey (Aotus trivirgatus): a quantitative comparison of medial, dorsomedial, dorsolateral, and middle temporal areas. Journal of Neurophysiology. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.1981.45.3.397

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.