↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
61 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.
Article details
Title
Conflict Resolution as Near-Threshold Decision-Making: A Spiking Neural Circuit Model with Two-Stage Competition for Antisaccadic Task
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, August 2016
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005081
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Automatic responses enable us to react quickly and effortlessly, but they often need to be inhibited so that an alternative, voluntary action can take place. To investigate the brain mechanism of controlled behavior, we investigated a biologically-based network model of spiking neurons for inhibitory control. In contrast to a simple race between pro- versus anti-response, our model incorporates a sensorimotor remapping module, and an action-selection module endowed with a "Stop" process through tonic inhibition. Both are under the modulation of rule-dependent control. We tested the model by applying it to the well known antisaccade task in which one must suppress the urge to look toward a visual target that suddenly appears, and shift the gaze diametrically away from the target instead. We found that the two-stage competition is crucial for reproducing the complex behavior and neuronal activity observed in the antisaccade task across multiple brain regions. Notably, our model demonstrates two types of errors: fast and slow. Fast errors result from failing to inhibit the quick automatic responses and therefore exhibit very short response times. Slow errors, in contrast, are due to incorrect decisions in the remapping process and exhibit long response times comparable to those of correct antisaccade responses. The model thus reveals a circuit mechanism for the empirically observed slow errors and broad distributions of erroneous response times in antisaccade. Our work suggests that selecting between competing automatic and voluntary actions in behavioral control can be understood in terms of near-threshold decision-making, sharing a common recurrent (attractor) neural circuit mechanism with discrimination in perception.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 2%
Unknown 60 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 21%
Student > Master 12 20%
Researcher 12 20%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Professor 4 7%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 12 20%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 16 26%
Psychology 11 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 11%
Computer Science 6 10%
Physics and Astronomy 3 5%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 11 18%
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 24 August 2016.
All research outputs
#24,754,523
of 34,361,833 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#8,556
of 10,410 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,405
of 343,855 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#109
of 125 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,361,833 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,410 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.7. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 343,855 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 125 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.