Cited by 102Visual perception and processing mechanismsMotor Control and AdaptationMultisensory perception and integration

Integration of visuospatial and effector information during symbolically cued limb movements in monkey lateral intraparietal area

Open access
Oristaglio, Jeff, Schneider, David M., Balan, Puiu F., Gottlieb, Jacqueline·2006·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Natural behavior requires close but flexible coordination between attention, defined as selection for perception, and action. In recent years a distributed network including the lateral intraparietal area (LIP) has been implicated in visuospatial selection for attention and rapid eye movements (saccades), but the relation between the attentional and motor functions of this area remains unclear. Here we tested LIP neurons in a task that involved not an ocular but a manual operant response. Monkeys viewed a display containing one cue and several distractors and reported the orientation of the cue (right- or left-facing) by releasing one of two bars grasped, respectively, with the right or left hand. The movement in this task thus was associated with (cued by), but not directed toward, the visual stimulus. A large majority of neurons responded more when the cue rather than when a distractor was in their receptive field, suggesting that they contribute to the attentional selection of the cue. A fraction of these neurons also was modulated by limb release, thus simultaneously encoding cue location and the active limb. The results suggest that the LIP links behaviorally relevant visual information with motor variables relevant for solving a task in a wide range of circumstances involving goal-directed or symbolically cued movements and eye as well as limb movements. A central function of the LIP may be to coordinate visual and motor selection during a wide variety of behaviors.

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 · 10.1523/jneurosci.1779-06.2006

Cites

44 of 44 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?

  • In a task where monkeys reported orientation of a peripheral target while maintaining central fixation, overt saccades had no value and were actively suppressed.

    “Monkeys had to perform the task while maintaining their gaze straight ahead (on the central fixation point), so that overt saccades had no value and would have been punished with a loss of reward - and indeed, monkeys actively suppressed the saccades.”

    From Attention, learning, and the value of information (2012) · cites this paper as Oristaglio et al., 2006

  • In that task, the informative cue had value, and lateral intraparietal area neurons continued selecting the cue, showing higher activity if the target E rather than a distractor was in their receptive field.

    “Nevertheless the informative cue had value, and neurons in the lateral intraparietal area continued selecting the cue, showing much higher activity if the “E” rather than a distractor was in their receptive field (Balan and Gottlieb, 2009; Balan et al., 2008; Oristaglio et al., 2006) (Fig. 4B).”

    From Attention, learning, and the value of information (2012) · cites this paper as Oristaglio et al., 2006

  • Parietal neurons encoded the location of the relevant cue, and some cells had only a target selection response, responding more if the cue rather than a distractor was in the RF regardless of manual release.

    “As I mentioned in the previous section, parietal neurons encoded the location of the relevant cue, and some of the cells had only a target selection response, responding more if the cue rather than a distractor was in the RF regardless of the manual release (Fig. 4B).”

    From Attention, learning, and the value of information (2012) · cites this paper as Oristaglio et al., 2006

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
Oristaglio, J., Schneider, D. M., Balan, P. F., & Gottlieb, J.
Affiliations
Columbia University (US)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2006-08-09
Volume
26
Issue
32
Pages
8310-8319
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W1978413093
Cited by
102
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 9
FWCI
4.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • McKnight Endowment Fund for Neuroscience
  • Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
  • W. M. Keck Foundation
  • McKnight Foundation
  • National Institutes of Health (5r24ey015634-05)
  • National Eye Institute (R24 EY-015634)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Multisensory perception and integration
Keywords
lateral intraparietal area, visuospatial attention, saccades, single-unit recording, cue selection, distractor suppression, goal-directed behavior
MeSH terms
Action Potentials, Animals, Haplorhini, Cues, Evoked Potentials, Visual, Extremities, Interneurons, Movement, Parietal Lobe, Space Perception, Information Storage and Retrieval, Evoked Potentials, Motor

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