The DOI matches its Crossref record; 46 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Competitive Mechanisms Subserve Attention in Macaque Areas V2 and V4
Open accessAbstract
It is well established that attention modulates visual processing in extrastriate cortex. However, the underlying neural mechanisms are unknown. A consistent observation is that attention has its greatest impact on neuronal responses when multiple stimuli appear together within a cell’s receptive field. One way to explain this is to assume that multiple stimuli activate competing populations of neurons and that attention biases this competition in favor of the attended stimulus. In the absence of competing stimuli, there is no competition to be resolved. Accordingly, attention has a more limited effect on the neuronal response to a single stimulus. To test this interpretation, we measured the responses of neurons in macaque areas V2 and V4 using a behavioral paradigm that allowed us to isolate automatic sensory processing mechanisms from attentional effects. First, we measured each cell’s response to a single stimulus presented alone inside the receptive field or paired with a second receptive field stimulus, while the monkey attended to a location outside the receptive field. Adding the second stimulus typically caused the neuron’s response to move toward the response that was elicited by the second stimulus alone. Then, we directed the monkey’s attention to one element of the pair. This drove the neuron’s response toward the response elicited when the attended stimulus appeared alone. These findings are consistent with the idea that attention biases competitive interactions among neurons, causing them to respond primarily to the attended stimulus. A quantitative neural model of attention is proposed to account for these results.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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 source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Later in time, competition can be biased by top-down control—either by prioritizing a spatial location (Moran & Desimone, 1985) or the perceptual feature(s) summarized in an “attentional template” (Chelazzi, Duncan, Miller, & Desimone, 1998; Reynolds, Chelazzi, & Desimone, 1999).”
From Selection history: How reward modulates selectivity of visual attention. (2018) · cites this paper as Reynolds, Chelazzi, & Desimone, 1999
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“It also shows good agreement (23) with other data in V4 (28) about the response of neurons to combinations of simple two-bar stimuli (within the receptive field of the S 2 units)”
From A feedforward architecture accounts for rapid categorization (2007) · cites this paper as [28]
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
Cites
Neural Mechanisms of Selective Visual Attention
Desimone, R., & Duncan, J. (1995) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev.ne.18.030195.001205 · Cited by 8,388
Self-citationShifts in Selective Visual Attention: Towards the Underlying Neural Circuitry
Koch, C., & Ullman, S. (1987) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-94-009-3833-5_5 · Cited by 3,762
Selective Attention Gates Visual Processing in the Extrastriate Cortex
Moran, J., & Desimone, R. (1985) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.4023713 · Cited by 2,433
Self-citationSelective Attention Gates Visual Processing in the Extrastriate Cortex
Moran, J., & Desimone, R. (2003) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/2834.003.0024 · Cited by 2,164
Self-citationGrossberg, S. (1976) · Biological Cybernetics · doi:10.1007/bf00344744 · Cited by 1,910
Neural mechanisms of spatial selective attention in areas V1, V2, and V4 of macaque visual cortex
Luck, S. J., Chelazzi, L., Hillyard, S. A., & Desimone, R. (1997) · Journal of Neurophysiology · doi:10.1152/jn.1997.77.1.24 · Cited by 1,615
Self-citationHow Does a Brain Build a Cognitive Code?
Grossberg, S. (1982) · Boston studies in the philosophy of science · doi:10.1007/978-94-009-7758-7_1 · Cited by 1,204
How does a brain build a cognitive code?
Grossberg, S. (1980) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.87.1.1 · Cited by 1,160
The representation of visual salience in monkey parietal cortex
Gottlieb, J. P., Kusunoki, M., & Goldberg, M. E. (1998) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35135 · Cited by 1,078
Motter, B. C. (1993) · Journal of Neurophysiology · doi:10.1152/jn.1993.70.3.909 · Cited by 1,055
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Chelazzi, 1994, Responses of V4 neurons during visual search., Soc Neurosci Abstr, 20, 1054
- Snedecor G Cochran W (1967) Analysis of covariance. Statistical methods, Sixth Edition, pp 419–446. (Iowa State UP, Ames, IA).
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A mechanism for cognitive dynamics: neuronal communication through neuronal coherence.
Fries, P. (2005) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2005.08.011 · Cited by 4,284
Hierarchical models of object recognition in cortex
Riesenhuber, M., & Poggio, T. (1999) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/14819 · Cited by 3,309
Rhythms for cognition: communication through coherence
Fries, P. (2015) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2015.09.034 · Cited by 2,725
Modulation of Oscillatory Neuronal Synchronization by Selective Visual Attention
Fries, P., Reynolds, J. H., Rorie, A. E., & Desimone, R. (2001) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1055465 · Cited by 2,786
Self-citationNeuronal Synchrony: A Versatile Code for the Definition of Relations?
Singer, W. (1999) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/s0896-6273(00)80821-1 · Cited by 2,581
Metadata
- Authors
- Reynolds, J. H., Chelazzi, L., & Desimone, R.
- Affiliations
- National Institutes of Health (US)
- University of Verona (IT)
- Venue
- The Journal of Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Society for Neuroscience
- Published
- 1999-03-01
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1736-1753
- ISSN
- 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
- 1529-2401
- PMC
- PMC6782185
- OpenAlex
- W2170478537
- Cited by
- 1,236
- References
- 46
- Citations by year
- 2026: 22 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 35 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 43 · 2015: 49 · 2014: 55 · 2013: 54 · 2012: 56
- FWCI
- 24.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Mental Health
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Multisensory perception and integration
- Keywords
- visual attention, competition mechanism, V2, area V4, extrastriate cortex, receptive fields, macaque visual cortex
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Attention, Behavior, Animal, Electrodes, Implanted, Macaca, Male, Models, Neurological, Neurons, Photic Stimulation, Reaction Time, Task Performance and Analysis, Visual Cortex, Visual Pathways, Visual Perception
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
