↓ Skip to main content

Competing visual flicker reveals attention-like rivalry in the fly brain

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Competing visual flicker reveals attention-like rivalry in the fly brain
Published in
Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fnint.2012.00096
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bruno van Swinderen

Abstract

There is increasing evidence that invertebrates such as flies display selective attention (van Swinderen, 2011a), although parallel processing of simultaneous cues remains difficult to demonstrate in such tiny brains. Local field potential (LFP) activity in the fly brain is associated with stimulus selection and suppression (van Swinderen and Greenspan, 2003; Tang and Juusola, 2010), like in other animals such as monkeys (Fries et al., 2001), suggesting that similar processes may be working to control attention in vastly different brains. To investigate selective attention to competing visual cues, I recorded brain activity from behaving flies while applying a method used in human attention studies: competing visual flicker, or frequency tags (Vialatte et al., 2010). Behavioral fixation in a closed-loop flight arena increased the response to visual flicker in the fly brain, and visual salience modulated responses to competing tags arranged in a center-surround pattern. Visual competition dynamics in the fly brain were dependent on the rate of pattern presentation, suggesting that attention-like switching in insects is tuned to the pace of visual changes in the environment rather than simply the passage of time.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 46 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 30%
Researcher 13 28%
Student > Master 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 2 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 40%
Neuroscience 14 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 9%
Environmental Science 2 4%
Computer Science 2 4%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 3 6%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 October 2012.
All research outputs
#20,257,104
of 25,759,158 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
#697
of 919 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#201,308
of 251,832 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
#66
of 93 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,759,158 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 919 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 251,832 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 93 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.