The DOI matches its Crossref record; 58 of the 58 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Internal and External Influences on the Rate of Sensory Evidence Accumulation in the Human Brain
Open accessAbstract
We frequently need to make timely decisions based on sensory evidence that is weak, ambiguous, or noisy resulting from conditions in the external environment (e.g., a cluttered visual scene) or within the brain itself (e.g., inattention, neural noise). Here we examine how externally and internally driven variations in the quality of sensory evidence affect the build-to-threshold dynamics of a supramodal “decision variable” signal and, hence, the timing and accuracy of decision reports in humans. Observers performed a continuous-monitoring version of the prototypical two-alternative dot-motion discrimination task, which is known to strongly benefit from sequential sampling and temporal accumulation of evidence. A centroparietal positive potential (CPP), which we previously established as a supramodal decision signal based on its invariance to motor or sensory parameters, exhibited two key identifying properties associated with the “decision variable” long described in sequential sampling models: (1) its buildup rate systematically scaled with sensory evidence strength across four levels of motion coherence, consistent with temporal integration; and (2) its amplitude reached a stereotyped level at the moment of perceptual report executions, consistent with a boundary-crossing stopping criterion. The buildup rate of the CPP also strongly predicted reaction time within coherence levels (i.e., independent of physical evidence strength), and this endogenous variation was linked with attentional fluctuations indexed by the level of parieto-occipital α-band activity preceding target onset. In tandem with the CPP, build-to-threshold dynamics were also observed in an effector-selective motor preparation signal; however, the buildup of this motor-specific process significantly lagged that of the supramodal process.
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
“This suggests that the P3 may encode motivationally significant events, which, in the present study, were the saliently colored/ethnic Black hands during SRC processing, potentially contributing to a dynamic decision process of linking perception to action31,42–45”
From Event-related potentials of automatic imitation are modulated by ethnicity during stimulus processing, but not during motor execution (2018) · cites this paper as [43]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“It has been suggested that the role of the P3 component lies in bridging stimulus perception and response execution31,44 in a dynamically evolving decision process, linking sensory encoding of stimulus perception to the preparation of action42,43,45, and/or response control44.”
From Event-related potentials of automatic imitation are modulated by ethnicity during stimulus processing, but not during motor execution (2018) · cites this paper as [43]
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
Delorme, A., & Makeig, S. (2004) · Journal of Neuroscience Methods · doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2003.10.009 · Cited by 24,371
Updating P300: An integrative theory of P3a and P3b
Polich, J. (2007) · Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2007.04.019 · Cited by 7,919
The Neural Basis of Decision Making
Gold, J. I., & Shadlen, M. N. (2007) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.29.051605.113038 · Cited by 3,764
Is the P300 component a manifestation of context updating?
Donchin, E., & Coles, M. G. H. (1988) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00058027 · Cited by 3,585
The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders' method
Sternberg, S. (1969) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/0001-6918(69)90055-9 · Cited by 3,137
Evoked-potential correlates of stimulus uncertainty
Sutton, S., Braren, M., Zubin, J., & John, E. R. (1965) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.150.3700.1187 · Cited by 3,061
The Diffusion Decision Model: Theory and Data for Two-Choice Decision Tasks
Ratcliff, R., & McKoon, G. (2008) · Neural Computation · doi:10.1162/neco.2008.12-06-420 · Cited by 3,059
The analysis of visual motion: a comparison of neuronal and psychophysical performance
Britten, K., Shadlen, M., Newsome, W., & Movshon, J. (1992) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.12-12-04745.1992 · Cited by 1,958
On the utility of P3 amplitude as a measure of processing capacity
Kok, A. (2001) · Psychophysiology · doi:10.1017/s0048577201990559 · Cited by 1,766
Neural Basis of a Perceptual Decision in the Parietal Cortex (Area LIP) of the Rhesus Monkey
Shadlen, M. N., & Newsome, W. T. (2001) · Journal of Neurophysiology · doi:10.1152/jn.2001.86.4.1916 · Cited by 1,755
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Diffusion decision model: Current issues and history
Ratcliff, R., Smith, P. L., Brown, S. D., & McKoon, G. (2016) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2016.01.007 · Cited by 1,630
“Some investigations have supported nonstationarity but have not generated the critical predictions for correct and error RT distributions ([52,87,111–113], see also [45,86,114]).”
BackgroundThe speed-accuracy tradeoff: history, physiology, methodology, and behavior
Heitz, R. P. (2014) · Frontiers in Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnins.2014.00150 · Cited by 1,054
“…supporting this claim derives from several sources, including human fMRI (Heekeren et al., 2004) and EEG (Ratcliff et al., 2009; O’Connell et al., 2012; van Vugt et al., 2012; Kelly and O’Connell, 2013), but by far the most convincing stems from single-neuron recordings in non-human primates.”
BackgroundKononowicz, T. W., van Rijn, H., & Meck, W. H. (2018) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781119170174.epcn114 · Cited by 767
The classic P300 encodes a build‐to‐threshold decision variable
Twomey, D. M., Murphy, P. R., Kelly, S. P., & O'Connell, R. G. (2015) · European Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1111/ejn.12936 · Cited by 376
“All single-trial EEG data were converted to current source density (CSD; Kayser & Tenke, 2006) to counteract spatial overlap between the P300 and a functionally distinct frontocentral negativity (see Data S1 and Kelly & O’Connell, 2013).”
BackgroundMethodSelf-citationPerceptual Decision Making in Rodents, Monkeys, and Humans
Hanks, T. D., & Summerfield, C. (2017) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2016.12.003 · Cited by 409
“More recently, EEG studies have identified a positive potential recorded over midline parietal electrodes that grows in a signal-dependent fashion as sensory evidence accumulates (Kelly and O’Connell, 2013; O’Connell et al., 2012).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Kelly, S. P., & O'Connell, R. G.
- Affiliations
- City College of New York (US)
- ORCID
- Kelly, Simon P.
- Venue
- The Journal of Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Society for Neuroscience
- Published
- 2013-12-11
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 50
- Pages
- 19434-19441
- ISSN
- 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
- 1529-2401
- PMC
- PMC6618757
- OpenAlex
- W2119976941
- Cited by
- 455
- References
- 56
- Citations by year
- 2026: 44 · 2025: 41 · 2024: 55 · 2023: 47 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 38 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 33 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 17
- FWCI
- 13.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Arrow@dit (Dublin Institute of Technology) (acceptedVersion)
- Research Repository UCD (University College Dublin) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Arrow@dit (Dublin Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion)
- Trinity's Access to Research Output (TARA) (Trinity College Dublin) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
- Keywords
- sensory evidence accumulation, sequential sampling, decision variables, motion coherence, temporal integration, boundary crossing, reaction time, alpha activity, attentional fluctuations, motor preparation, perceptual decision making
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Brain, Brain Mapping, Decision Making, Electroencephalography, Female, Humans, Male, Models, Neurological, Reaction Time
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
