↓ Skip to main content

Summation of Visual Motion across Eye Movements Reflects a Nonspatial Decision Mechanism

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neuroscience, July 2010
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
96 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
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
Summation of Visual Motion across Eye Movements Reflects a Nonspatial Decision Mechanism
Published in
Journal of Neuroscience, July 2010
DOI 10.1523/jneurosci.1705-10.2010
Pubmed ID
Authors

A. P. Morris, C. C. Liu, S. J. Cropper, J. D. Forte, B. Krekelberg, J. B. Mattingley

Abstract

Human vision remains perceptually stable even though retinal inputs change rapidly with each eye movement. Although the neural basis of visual stability remains unknown, a recent psychophysical study pointed to the existence of visual feature-representations anchored in environmental rather than retinal coordinates (e.g., "spatiotopic" receptive fields; Melcher and Morrone, 2003). In that study, sensitivity to a moving stimulus presented after a saccadic eye movement was enhanced when preceded by another moving stimulus at the same spatial location before the saccade. The finding is consistent with spatiotopic sensory integration, but it could also have arisen from a probabilistic improvement in performance due to the presence of more than one motion signal for the perceptual decision. Here we show that this statistical advantage accounts completely for summation effects in this task. We first demonstrate that measurements of summation are confounded by noise related to an observer's uncertainty about motion onset times. When this uncertainty is minimized, comparable summation is observed regardless of whether two motion signals occupy the same or different locations in space, and whether they contain the same or opposite directions of motion. These results are incompatible with the tuning properties of motion-sensitive sensory neurons and provide no evidence for a spatiotopic representation of visual motion. Instead, summation in this context reflects a decision mechanism that uses abstract representations of sensory events to optimize choice behavior.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 8 8%
United Kingdom 3 3%
United States 2 2%
Japan 2 2%
France 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Portugal 1 1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 74 77%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 30%
Researcher 25 26%
Student > Master 11 11%
Professor 6 6%
Student > Postgraduate 4 4%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 11 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 26 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 22%
Neuroscience 11 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 8%
Computer Science 8 8%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 13 14%
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 17 October 2013.
All research outputs
#15,283,138
of 22,727,570 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neuroscience
#18,538
of 23,154 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,366
of 94,498 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neuroscience
#147
of 215 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,727,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 23,154 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 94,498 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 215 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.