Neural basis of a perceptual decision in the parietal cortex (area LIP) of the rhesus monkey.

By Michael N. Shadlen, William T. Newsome. Journal of Neurophysiology, 2001

1,845 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Molecular Biology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7d4de1ad7c100a27cf1b72f29544f800e8eeebe3

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Molecular Biology

Citations in the corpus

Intention, action planning, and decision making in parietal-frontal circuits. (2009, methodology): “…, cognitive set, shape recognition, decision making, and timing (Platt and Glimcher, 1999; Snyder et al., 1997; Freedman and Assad, 2006; Shadlen and Newsome, 2001; Maimon and Assad, 2006; Eskandar and Assad, 1999; Janssen and Shadlen, 2005; Sereno and Maunsell, 1998; Stoet and Snyder,…”
The effect of stimulus strength on the speed and accuracy of a perceptual decision. (2005, methodology): “Similar random dot stimuli have been used in previous psychophysical and physiological studies because they control motion strength without providing positional cues (e.g., Newsome et al., 1989; Shadlen & Newsome, 2001).”
A role for neural integrators in perceptual decision making. (2003, methodology): “The integrated output from MT, which constitutes the decision signal, is scaled and offset to approximate the firing rates obtained from LIP neurons recorded during performance of the random dots task (Shadlen and Newsome 2001; Roitman and Shadlen 2002).”
Probabilistic decision making by slow reverberation in cortical circuits. (2002, positive): “In recent years, this (Schall et al., 1995; Shadlen and Newsome, 1996, 2001), the presumed neural process underlying slow accumu-field has begun to attract attention of physiologists inter- ested in the neural basis of decision making (Parker and lation of sensory evidence.”
Response of Neurons in the Lateral Intraparietal Area during a Combined Visual Discrimination Reaction Time Task (2002, background): “For example, it would provide a qualitative explanation for the persistence of activity in the delay period seen in the fixed duration version of the task (Shadlen and Newsome, 2001).”
Neuronal Reward and Decision Signals: From Theories to Data. (2015, methodology): “A generic model for perceptual discrimination of random dot motion direction in LIP neurons uses a difference signal derived from pools of specific direction-sensitive input neurons from middle temporal (MT) cortex (535).”
Human volition: towards a neuroscience of will (2008, background): “For example, single-unit recordings from the primate intraparietal sulcus in tasks in which the animal must choose between equally rewarding alternatives show that neurons in the lateral intraparietal area (LIP) might encode the specific behavioural outcome that the animal has chose”
Decision making in recurrent neuronal circuits. (2008, methodology): “In RDM discrimination experiments, recorded LIP neurons were preselected using the criterion that they displayed directionally tuned mnemonic activity in a delayed oculomotor response task (Shadlen and Newsome, 1996, 2001; Roitman and Shadlen, 2002; Huk and Shadlen, 2005).”
Neural basis of reinforcement learning and decision making. (2012, background): “Such persistent activity has been often associated with working memory (Funahashi et al. 1989, Wang 2001), but may also subserve the temporal integration of noisy inputs (Shadlen & Newsome 2001, Roitman & Shadlen, 2002, Wang, 2002, Curtis & Lee 2010).”
Attention, Intention, and Priority in the Parietal Lobe (2010, background): “…process in estimating time (Janssen & Shadlen 2005, Leon & Shadlen 2003, Maimon & Assad 2006), the direction of motion of a noisy stimulus (Churchland et al. 2008, Roitman & Shadlen 2002, Shadlen & Newsome 2001), confidence (Kiani & Shadlen 2009), and probabilistic reasoning (Yang & Shadlen 2007).”
An integrative theory of locus coeruleus-norepinephrine function: adaptive gain and optimal performance. (2005, methodology): “…a wealth of findings from other 2AFC tasks (e.g., Botvinick et al. 2001; Cohen et al. 1990, 1992; Usher & McClelland 2001) as well as the dynamics of neural activity in response-selective brain areas associated with the performance of such tasks (e.g., Gold & Shadlen 2002, Shadlen & Newsome 2001).”
Adaptive gain and the role of the locus coeruleus–norepinephrine system in optimal performance (2005, background): “Cognitive and neuroscientific studies have made considerable progress in identifying mechanisms associated with the simplest decision processes involved in 2AFC tasks (e.g., Hanes and Schall, 1996; Shadlen and Newsome, 1996, 2001; Schall and Thompson, 1999; Gold and Shadlen, 2000).”
A model of interval timing by neural integration (2011, background): “This topic has received a great deal of attention in theoretical neuroscience, both because of its computational usefulness [it plays a central role, for example, in influential models of decision making (Shadlen and Newsome, 2001) and eye movement control (Seung, 1996)] and because of the difficult”