Cited by 344Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesMotor Control and AdaptationNeural dynamics and brain function

Integrated neural processes for defining potential actions and deciding between them: a computational model

Open access
Cisek, Paul·2006·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

To successfully accomplish a behavioral goal such as reaching for an object, an animal must solve two related problems: to decide which object to reach and to plan the specific parameters of the movement. Traditionally, these two problems have been viewed as separate, and theories of decision making and motor planning have been developed primarily independently. However, neural data suggests that these processes involve the same brain regions and are performed in an integrated manner. Here, a computational model is described that addresses both the question of how different potential actions are specified and how the brain decides between them. In the model, multiple potential actions are simultaneously represented as continuous regions of activity within populations of cells in frontoparietal cortex. These representations engage in a competition for overt execution that is biased by modulatory influences from prefrontal cortex. The model neural populations exhibit activity patterns that correlate with both the spatial metrics of potential actions and their associated decision variables, in a manner similar to activities in parietal, prefrontal, and premotor cortex. The model therefore suggests an explanation for neural data that have been hard to account for in terms of serial theories that propose that decision making occurs before action planning. In addition to simulating the activity of individual neurons during decision tasks, the model also reproduces key aspects of the spatial and temporal statistics of human choices and makes a number of testable predictions.

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.5605-05.2006

Cites

72 of 72 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?

  • A decision is likely to involve parallel processing across brain regions rather than proceeding strictly in serial stages.

    “Rather than proceeding strictly in serial stages, a decision is likely to involve parallel processing across brain regions.”

    From Decision Making in Recurrent Neuronal Circuits (2008) · cites this paper as Cisek, 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

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Dayan P, Abbott LF (2001) Theoretical neuroscience. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
  2. Shafir E, Tversky A (1995) Decision making. In: Thinking: an invitation to cognitive science (Smith EE, Osherson DN, eds), pp 77-100. Cambridge, MA: MIT.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cisek, P.
Affiliations
Université de Montréal (CA)
Corresponding author
Cisek, Paul
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2006-09-20
Volume
26
Issue
38
Pages
9761-9770
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2042907834
Cited by
344
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 42 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 30 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 20
FWCI
6.96
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)
Funders
Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
Keywords
action selection, decision-making, motor planning, frontoparietal cortex, prefrontal cortex, population coding, computational models of decision making
MeSH terms
Decision Making, Models, Neurological, Neurons, Neural Networks, Computer, Computational Biology

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