↓ Skip to main content

A hierarchy of timescales explains distinct effects of local inhibition of primary visual cortex and frontal eye fields

Overview of attention for article published in eLife, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
30 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 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
A hierarchy of timescales explains distinct effects of local inhibition of primary visual cortex and frontal eye fields
Published in
eLife, September 2016
DOI 10.7554/elife.15252
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luca Cocchi, Martin V Sale, Leonardo L Gollo, Peter T Bell, Vinh T Nguyen, Andrew Zalesky, Michael Breakspear, Jason B Mattingley

Abstract

Within the primate visual system, areas at lower levels of the cortical hierarchy process basic visual features, whereas those at higher levels, such as the frontal eye fields (FEF), are thought to modulate sensory processes via feedback connections. Despite these functional exchanges during perception, there is little shared activity between early and late visual regions at rest. How interactions emerge between regions encompassing distinct levels of the visual hierarchy remains unknown. Here we combined neuroimaging, non-invasive cortical stimulation and computational modelling to characterize changes in functional interactions across widespread neural networks before and after local inhibition of primary visual cortex or FEF. We found that stimulation of early visual cortex selectively increased feedforward interactions with FEF and extrastriate visual areas, whereas identical stimulation of the FEF decreased feedback interactions with early visual areas. Computational modelling suggests that these opposing effects reflect a fast-slow timescale hierarchy from sensory to association areas.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Germany 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Unknown 69 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 32%
Researcher 17 23%
Student > Master 10 14%
Unspecified 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Other 10 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 18 24%
Unspecified 16 22%
Neuroscience 16 22%
Engineering 6 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 8%
Other 12 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 06 February 2019.
All research outputs
#488,924
of 12,504,789 outputs
Outputs from eLife
#1,572
of 6,340 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,873
of 262,292 outputs
Outputs of similar age from eLife
#82
of 337 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,504,789 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,340 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 32.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
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 262,292 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 337 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.