Cited by 283Visual perception and processing mechanismsNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesFace Recognition and Perception

Evidence accumulation and the moment of recognition: dissociating perceptual recognition processes using fMRI

Open access
Ploran, Elisabeth J., Nelson, Steven M., Velanova, Katerina, Donaldson, David I., Petersen, Steven E., Wheeler, Mark E.·2007·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Decision making can be conceptualized as the culmination of an integrative process in which evidence supporting different response options accumulates gradually over time. We used functional magnetic resonance imaging to investigate brain activity leading up to and during decisions about perceptual object identity. Pictures were revealed gradually and subjects signaled the time of recognition (T R ) with a button press. We examined the time course of T R -dependent activity to determine how brain regions tracked the timing of recognition. In several occipital regions, activity increased primarily as stimulus information increased, suggesting a role in lower-level sensory processing. In inferior temporal, frontal, and parietal regions, a gradual buildup in activity peaking in correspondence with T R suggested that these regions participated in the accumulation of evidence supporting object identity. In medial frontal cortex, anterior insula/frontal operculum, and thalamus, activity remained near baseline until T R , suggesting a relation to the moment of recognition or the decision itself. The findings dissociate neural processes that function in concert during perceptual recognition decisions.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

Using fMRI with gradually revealed pictures, this paper dissociates three neural profiles during perceptual recognition: sensory processors tracking stimulus information, accumulator regions whose activity builds up until recognition, and moment-of-recognition regions active only at the recognition decision. Recognition time (TR) systematically shifted onset/peak timing in accumulator and recognition regions, while sensory regions did not show TR-dependent onset changes.

Key findings

  • Behavioral: Exp1 (n=12) had 620/704 picture trials with recognition during steps 1–7; 564 (91.0%) were verified accurate. Exp2 (n=13) had 985/1148 trials with recognition before VoA; 852 (86.5%) later verified. Most correct recognitions occurred in TR4–7.
  • Cluster analysis of 73 Exp1 ROIs yielded four time-course clusters; the positive cluster contained 32 ROIs, later split by interpolation into sensory (5), accumulator (13), and moment-of-recognition (14) groups.
  • Sensory ROIs (posterior occipital) had onset times that changed little across TR4–7 (mean 5.5, 5.2, 4.8, 5.2 s) and the widest responses (FWHM 15.7, 15.2, 14.6, 15.3 s). Accumulator ROIs (occipital/fusiform, dlPFC, PPL) showed TR-dependent buildup: onset 7.1, 7.0, 8.2, 8.6 s; peak 14.8, 16.5, 18.3, 20.0 s; leading-edge slope decreased 0.13, 0.11, 0.10, 0.10. Moment-of-recognition ROIs (meFG/pre-SMA, ACC, aI/fO, thalamus) had markedly later onsets as TR increased (8.5, 12.0, 13.3, 14.3 s), peaks 14.2, 16.3, 18.3, 20.2 s, and narrowest widths (7.1, 4.8, 5.7, 5.4 s).
  • Statistical tests supported dissociation: onset showed a main effect of TR (F(2.5,73.4)=14.47, p<0.0001) and TR×region interaction (F(5.1,73.4)=10.91, p<0.0001); width differed by region type (F(2,29)=90.48, p<0.0001).

Methods

  • Two fMRI experiments with gradual unmasking of 233 grayscale images over eight revelation steps; participants pressed a button when they recognized the picture (TR) and again at full revelation if earlier recognition was correct (VoA). Exp1 used within-trial jitter; Exp2 removed within-trial jitter and added trials.
  • 31 right-handed native English speakers (18 female, age 19–29) began; 25 were analyzed after exclusions (12 Exp1, 13 Exp2). Imaging used a Siemens Allegra 3T scanner; data were analyzed with voxelwise GLM and repeated-measures ANOVA.
  • Exp1 identified 73 ROIs by comparing TR and VoA activity; Exp2 extracted TR-dependent time courses from those ROIs. Hierarchical cluster analysis (UPGMA; cophenetic r=0.8234) classified time courses, and linear interpolation quantified onset, peak, and FWHM.

Limitations

  • Stated: the authors could not perform trial-level analyses, so findings are too broad to test different accumulator models; the degree to which TR-dependent buildup reflects evidence accumulation per se is unclear and could be a byproduct of information processing.
  • Stated: the precise functional relationship between accumulator and moment-of-recognition regions is unknown, including whether decisions arise from accumulators or from regions active at the moment of recognition.
  • Evident from text: sample size after exclusions was modest (25 analyzed), some ROIs showed atypical or late responses possibly related to VoA rather than TR, and bottom-up stimulus-specific differences may have influenced recognition times.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1523/jneurosci.3522-07.2007

Cites

106 of 106 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 36 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    In medial frontal cortex, anterior insula/frontal operculum, and thalamus, activity remained near baseline until TR.

    “In medial frontal cortex, anterior insula/frontal operculum, and thalamus, activity remained near baseline until T R , suggesting a relation to the moment of recognition or the decision itself.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The time of recognition (TR) button press provides an estimate of the time of recognition.
  • Findingown data

    In inferior temporal, frontal, and parietal regions, a gradual buildup in activity peaked in correspondence with TR.

    “In inferior temporal, frontal, and parietal regions, a gradual buildup in activity peaking in correspondence with T R suggested that these regions participated in the accumulation of evidence supporting object identity.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The time of recognition (TR) button press provides an estimate of the time of recognition.
  • Findingown data

    In several occipital regions, activity increased primarily as stimulus information increased.

    “In several occipital regions, activity increased primarily as stimulus information increased, suggesting a role in lower-level sensory processing.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The time of recognition (TR) button press provides an estimate of the time of recognition.
  • Findingown data

    Data from the two studies demonstrate that gradual revelation produced significant spread in recognition times.

    “Data from the two studies demonstrate that gradual revelation produced significant spread in recognition times.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Time courses from the two motor ROIs were highly similar.

    “Time courses from the two ROIs were highly similar, so to increase power we merged the ROIs before extracting time courses for T R 4 -7.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 27
  • May combine two claims. 18
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    The motor analysis identified two ROIs encompassing precentral and postcentral gyri.

    “We identified two ROIs encompassing precentral and postcentral gyri (left peak ϭ Ϫ41, Ϫ26, ϩ58; right ϭ ϩ39, Ϫ20, ϩ57) (supplemental Figure 3, available at www.jneurosci.org as supplemental material).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The distribution of binned correct trials in Exp2 was quite similar to the distribution from Exp1, with 157, 156, 247, and 204 in TR4-7, respectively.

    “The distribution of binned correct trials was quite similar to the distribution from Exp1 (Fig. 1c), with 157, 156, 247, and 204 in T R 4 -7, respectively.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    For this dataset, UPGMA gives a larger cophenetic correlation coefficient (0.8234) than single linkage (0.6584) or complete linkage (0.7781).

    “This is indeed the case for our dataset where UPGMA gives a larger cophenetic r (0.8234) than either single linkage (0.6584) or complete linkage (0.7781) approaches.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingown data

    The results did not change markedly across the four onset threshold values (10, 15, 20, and 25% of peak).

    “The results did not change markedly across the four values, so we used the mean of the four values as the onset point.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    The Exp1 analysis produced 73 ROIs.

    “This procedure produced 73 ROIs (see Fig. 4, middle; Tables 1234), which were then used in Exp2 to examine the evolution of T R -dependent BOLD activity during nonjittered revelation.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    In Exp2, behavioral data indicated that most correct recognition responses occurred in steps TR4-7.

    “Behavioral data indicated that most correct recognition responses occurred in steps T R 4 -7 (Fig. 1c, shaded bars).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The time of recognition (TR) button press provides an estimate of the time of recognition.
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The change in peak values over TR4-7 in sensory ROIs differed from accumulator and recognition ROIs, but there was no difference in peak values over TR4-7 between accumulator and recognition ROIs.

    “interactions of T R with region type indicated that the change in peak values over T R 4 -7 in sensory ROIs differed from accumulator (F (2.6,41.1)ϭ 9.64, p Ͻ 0.0001) and recognition (F (2.2,38.0)ϭ 17.59, p Ͻ 0.0001) ROIs.However, there was no difference in peak values over T R 4 -7 between accumulator and recognition ROIs (F (2.7,67.6)ϭ 1.46, p ϭ 0.23).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    ROIs in or near bilateral striatum clustered broadly into the recognition group, but their time course parameters were least similar to other ROIs in the group.

    “In addition, ROIs in or near bilateral striatum (Ϫ11, ϩ07, ϩ05; ϩ12, ϩ06, ϩ03), near the head of the caudate nucleus, clustered broadly into the recognition group.However, their time course parameters were least similar to other ROIs in the group (supplemental Fig. 2, available at www.jneurosci.org as supplemental material).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Peak times increased as a function of TR in all three region types, and the rate of increase in the sensory ROI group was significantly less than in accumulator and recognition ROI groups.

    “Peak times increased as a function of T R in all three region types.The 2 ϫ 4 analyses indicated that the rate of increase in the sensory ROI group was significantly less than in accumulator and recognition ROI groups.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In recognition ROIs, slope values showed neither a main effect of TR nor a significant linear trend.

    “The same analysis on data from recognition ROIs (T R 4 -7 means: 0.10, 0.13, 0.10, 0.13) revealed neither a main effect of T R (F (1.9,24.6)ϭ 1.28, p ϭ 0.29) nor a significant linear trend (F (1,13) ϭ 0.57, p ϭ 0.46).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The 3x4 ANOVA of peak times revealed a significant main effect of TR and an interaction of TR with region type.

    “The 3 ϫ 4 ANOVA with three levels of region type revealed a significant main effect of T R (F (2.8,81.0)ϭ 225.62, p Ͻ 0.0001) and an interaction of T R with region type (F (5.6,81.0)ϭ 8.06, p Ͻ 0.0001)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Response widths were greatest for sensory ROIs, least for recognition ROIs, and intermediate for accumulator ROIs, and differed significantly across region type.

    “The principle result from this analysis was that response widths, which were greatest for sensory ROIs, least for recognition ROIs, and intermediate for accumulator ROIs, differed significantly across region type.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    In other regions near the angular gyrus and the precuneus, activity appeared to decrease at a rate corresponding with TR.

    “In other regions near the angular gyrus and the precuneus (Fig. 4d), activity appeared to decrease at a rate corresponding with T R .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In accumulator regions, when recognition occurred early in the trial, the leading edge of activity followed a steep slope; as recognition time increased, the slope became shallower.

    “For instance, when recognition occurred early in the trial, the leading edge of activity followed a steep slope.As recognition time increased, however, the slope became shallower, suggesting a longer diffusion process.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The time at which subjects press the button (TR) corresponds to the moment of perceptual recognition.
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Onset values at different TRs did not differ in sensory ROIs and did not reliably follow a linear trend across TR4-7.

    “According to these analyses, onset values at different T R s did not differ in sensory ROIs (F (1.3,5.4)ϭ 1.67, p ϭ 0.26) and did not reliably follow a linear trend across T R 4 -7 (F (1,4) ϭ 1.04, p ϭ 0.37).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    BOLD responses in bilateral aI/fO, dorsal ACC, meFG/pre-SMA, and thalamus were markedly more transient, with onsets and peaks that appeared to correlate positively with TR.

    “In contrast, BOLD responses in bilateral aI/fO (Fig. 4f ), dorsal ACC, meFG/pre-SMA (Fig. 4e), and thalamus were markedly more transient, with onsets and peaks that appeared to correlate positively with T R .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In accumulator ROIs, slope values showed a main effect of TR and a significant linear trend.

    “This analysis revealed a main effect of T R (F (2.1,25.7)ϭ 6.15, p Ͻ 0.01) and a significant linear trend (F (1,12) ϭ 8.91, p Ͻ 0.05).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The 3x4 ANOVA of onset times revealed a significant main effect of TR and a significant interaction of TR with region type.

    “The 3 ϫ 4 ANOVA of onset times with the three region groups revealed a significant main effect of T R (F (2.5,73.4)ϭ 14.47, p Ͻ 0.0001) and a significant interaction of T R with region type (F (5.1,73.4)ϭ 10.91, p Ͻ 0.0001)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The current results do not directly differentiate among these possibilities but do temporally dissociate processes occurring at the moment of recognition and the subsequent verification of that recognition.

    “The current results do not directly differentiate among these possibilities but do temporally dissociate processes occurring at the moment of recognition and the subsequent verification of that recognition.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The absence of a clear response at VoA supports the view that meFG/pre-SMA function is not directly related to action planning or execution, because the motor demand at VoA did not produce a marked change in signal in meFG/pre-SMA.

    “The absence of a clear response at VoA supports this view, because the motor demand at VoA did not produce a marked change in signal in meFG/pre-SMA.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    The relationship between neuronal activity and choice outcome indicates that neural processors compute behavioral decision variables by integrating afferent inputs over time.

    “The relationship between neuronal activity and choice outcome indicates that neural processors compute behavioral decision variables by integrating afferent inputs over time (Hanes and Schall, 1996;Kim and Shadlen, 1999;Platt and Glimcher, 1999;Shadlen and Newsome, 2001;Cook and Maunsell, 2002;Roitman and Shadlen, 2002;Hanks et al., 2006;Gold and Shadlen, 2007).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Hanes and Schall, 1996

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Kim and Shadlen, 1999

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Shadlen and Newsome, 2001 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    The study did not explicitly model the shape of the hemodynamic response.

    “It is important to emphasize that, despite the preceding hypotheses describing eventdependent time course shapes, we did not explicitly model the shape of the hemodynamic response.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    A large body of literature implicates anterior cingulate and frontal opercular regions in decision-making processing.

    “A large body of literature on decision making (Bush et al., 2002;Carlson et al., 2006;Grinband et al., 2006;Hampton and O'Doherty, 2007;Thielscher and Pessoa, 2007) implicates anterior cingulate and frontal opercular regions in this type of processing.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Bush et al., 2002

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Carlson et al., 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Grinband et al., 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Accumulator models appear to describe the evolution of neural spiking rates in macaque frontal eye fields during initiation of eye movements, lateral intraparietal area and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex during motion detection, and superior colliculus during distance judgments.

    “Such models also appear to describe the evolution of neural spiking rates in macaque frontal eye fields during initiation of eye movements (Hanes and Schall, 1996), the lateral intraparietal area (Shadlen and Newsome, 2001) and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) (Kim and Shadlen, 1999) during motion detection, and superior colliculus during distance judgments (Ratcliff et al., 2003).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Hanes and Schall, 1996

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Shadlen and Newsome, 2001 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Kim and Shadlen, 1999

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    The two motor ROIs were merged before extracting time courses for TR4-7 to increase power.

    “Time courses from the two ROIs were highly similar, so to increase power we merged the ROIs before extracting time courses for T R 4 -7.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    A second response at the end of the trial, when the stimulus was fully revealed, verified the accuracy of earlier recognition.

    “A second response at the end of the trial, when the stimulus was fully revealed, verified the accuracy (VoA) of earlier recognition.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    Response hand was counterbalanced across participants to help factor out basic lateralized motor signals in group analyses.

    “To help factor out basic lateralized motor signals in group analyses, response hand was counterbalanced across participants (Thielscher and Pessoa, 2007).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Thielscher and Pessoa, 2007

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Accumulator models have proven highly effective in describing human performance in recognition memory, lexical decisions, economic decisions, and sensory discriminations.

    “Accumulator models have proven highly effective in describing human performance in recognition memory, lexical decisions, economic decisions, and sensory discriminations (Ratcliff, 1978;Busemeyer, 1985;Bundesen, 1990;Nosofsky and Palmeri, 1997;Ratcliff and Rouder, 1998;Logan and Gordon, 2001;Ratcliff et al., 2004;Gold and Shadlen, 2007).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Ratcliff, 1978

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Busemeyer, 1985

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Bundesen, 1990

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Imaging analyses focused on correct TR4-7 trials to maximize power.

    “To maximize power, imaging analyses focused on correct T R 4 -7 trials.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Accumulator models describe evidence gathering as a gradual process in which evidence supporting different choices accrues over time.

    “Accumulator models (Audley and Pike, 1965;Link and Heath, 1975;Ratcliff, 1978;Ratcliff and McKoon, 1982;Smith and Vickers, 1988;Usher and McClelland, 2001) describe evidence gathering as a gradual process in which evidence supporting different choices accrues over time.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Audley and Pike, 1965

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Link and Heath, 1975

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Ratcliff, 1978

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    VoA served as one method to control for motor activity occurring at the time of recognition.

    “Because we were primarily interested in studying decision processes, VoA served as one method to control for motor activity occurring at T R .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Comparing TR and VoA events in Exp1 reduced the probability that ROIs would be related to motor processing.

    “First, comparing T R and VoA events in Exp1 reduced the probability that ROIs would be related to motor processing.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    All F and p values of repeated measures incorporate the Greenhouse-Geisser sphericity correction to adjust the degrees of freedom.

    “All F and p values of repeated measures incorporate the Greenhouse-Geisser sphericity correction to adjust the degrees of freedom.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Regions demonstrating accumulation may compute decision variables, such that the quantity of accrued activity is associated with decision outcome.

    “Regions demonstrating accumulation may compute decision variables, such that the quantity of accrued activity is associated with decision outcome.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Certain visible elements (e.g., geons) provide a higher degree of object level information than straight lines.

    “For example, certain visible elements (e.g., geons) provide a higher degree of object level information than straight lines (Biederman, 1987).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Biederman, 1987

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The degree to which the TR-dependent buildup in activity reflects evidence accumulation per se is not clear from the data.

    “Thus, the degree to which the T Rdependent buildup in activity reflects”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Some objects may have been identified earlier in the trial because more critically identifiable features were unmasked earlier.

    “That is, some objects may have been identified earlier in the trial because more critically identifiable features were unmasked earlier.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In Ratcliff's two-choice diffusion model, evidence is accumulated in a drift parameter and decisions are generated when the value of the drift parameter surpasses a response boundary.

    “For example, in Ratcliff's two-choice diffusion model (Ratcliff, 1978;Ratcliff et al., 2004), evidence is accumulated in a drift parameter and decisions are generated when the value of the drift parameter surpasses a response boundary.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Ratcliff, 1978

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Ratcliff et al., 2004

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Several studies of recognition memory have reported that IPS and precuneus are most active when participants respond old and least active when they respond new, independently of accuracy.

    “Several studies of recognition memory have reported that IPS and precuneus are most active when participants respond”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Wheeler and Buckner, 2003

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Kahn et al., 2004

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    In this framework, information processing proceeds through sensory processing and evidence accumulation to decision mechanisms, and culminates in a behavior.

    “In this framework, information processing proceeds through sensory processing and evidence accumulation to decision mechanisms, and culminates in a behavior.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The ACC and aI/fO have been associated with aspects of decision making, including choice, error detection, and error likelihood.

    “The ACC, and more recently the aI/fO, have both been associated with aspects of decision making, including choice (Hampton and O'Doherty, 2007;Thielscher and Pessoa, 2007), error detection (Dehaene et al., 1994), error likelihood (Brown and Braver, 2005)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Hampton and O'Doherty, 2007

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Dehaene et al., 1994

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Brown and Braver, 2005

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    The precise functional relationship between accumulators and moment-of-recognition areas is unknown.

    “Despite the finding presented here, the precise functional relationship between accumulators and moment-ofrecognition areas is unknown.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
42 of 42
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The data values between any two time points are adequately approximated by a linear fit between those two points.

    “Linear interpolation provided a straightforward procedure to quantify time course parameters across a variety of different types of response profile, while making the simple assumption that the data values between any two time points are adequately approximated by a linear fit between those two points.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The time of recognition (TR) button press provides an estimate of the time of recognition.

    “This response provided an estimate of the time of recognition (T R ).”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The moment of recognition is a discrete event.

    “Because the moment of recognition is a discrete event, responses should occur transiently at T R (Fig. 2c).”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Accumulation and recognition are inherently associated with TR.

    “For example, because accumulation and recognition are inherently associated with T R , the time to peak activity for both should shift in time as a function of T R .”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Evidence gathering is a prolonged process.

    “Second, because evidence gathering is a prolonged process, time courses associated with accumulation should be more extended in time (i.e., greater width), albeit showing narrower widths than regions related to visual processing.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Accumulation has a role in integrating information over time.

    “First, because of a hypothetical role in integrating information over time, BOLD responses associated with accumulation should increase as soon as information related to a decision becomes available (e.g., earlier onset) (Fig. 2b).”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The time at which subjects press the button (TR) corresponds to the moment of perceptual recognition.

    “Subjects pressed a button when they could identify the picture with a reasonable degree of confidence, and again at VoA if earlier recognition had been correct.”
7 of 7

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 picture recognition task, areas that exhibited a gradual buildup in activity peaking in correspondence with the time of recognition were the parietal and frontal areas as well as the inferior temporal area.

    “In another study (Ploran et al., 2007), as a subject viewed pictures that were revealed from a blank screen gradually in eight steps (2 s each), the areas that exhibited a gradual buildup in activity peaking in correspondence with the time of recognition were the parietal and frontal areas as well as the inferior temporal area.”

    From Decision Making in Recurrent Neuronal Circuits (2008) · cites this paper as Ploran et al., 2007

Self-check

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

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Parahippocampal ROI is labeled left in the text and right in the table

    Minor

    The description of the seven-ROI late-positive cluster places its parahippocampal ROI on the left, whereas the corresponding Table 2 entry labels it right.

  • Response-hand counts do not match the Exp1 sample

    Minor

    The response-hand groups total 13 participants, but the paper says the analysis used Exp1 data, for which it reports 12 participants.

2 of 2

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 109 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ploran, E. J., Nelson, S. M., Velanova, K., Donaldson, D. I., Petersen, S. E., & Wheeler, M. E.
Affiliations
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • University of Stirling (GB)
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2007-10-31
Volume
27
Issue
44
Pages
11912-11924
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2088702666
Cited by
282
References
109
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 23
FWCI
8.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Stirling Online Research Repository (University of Stirling) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
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 › Face Recognition and Perception
Keywords
perceptual identification, evidence accumulation, decision-making, object identity, visual object recognition, inferior temporal cortex, frontal cortex, parietal cortex, medial frontal cortex, anterior insula, frontal operculum, thalamus, occipital cortex
MeSH terms
Adult, Analysis of Variance, Brain Mapping, Decision Making, Female, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Oxygen, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Photic Stimulation, Psychomotor Performance, Reaction Time, Time Factors, Visual Cortex, Cluster Analysis, Linear Models

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-10.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-10.

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