Effects of adding a second stimulus or attention to the receptive field.
Markus Helmer
Vladislav Kozyrev
Valeska Stephan
Stefan Treue
Theo Geisel
Demian Battaglia
10.1371/journal.pone.0146500.g008
https://plos.figshare.com/articles/figure/_Effects_of_adding_a_second_stimulus_or_attention_to_the_receptive_field_/1638927
<p><b>A)</b> Each dot in this cartoon (not based on measured data) represents the observed spike count in one trial. For a given stimulus, spike count distributions can differ between experimental conditions either significantly (e. g. at 60°) or not (e. g. at 240°). <b>B)</b> Distribution of the proportion of cells with a significant difference between conditions for a given number of stimuli (maximum 12). The green histograms represent the two conditions where a second stimulus was added and pink histograms the conditions where attention was switched. <b>C-F)</b> Histograms show the stimulus-dependent fraction of cells with a non-significant response modulation (blue), a significant response enhancement (green) or response suppression (pink). The dotted and orange arrows along the <i>x</i>-axes in E and F indicate the RDP direction not present in the uni condition and the attended RDP in ain condition, respectively. Across the population a second stimulus tended to increase firing rates around 120°(C,D) and to decrease them around 240°. Attention asymmetrically affected the left and right peak in the spatially separated paradigm (E) whereas it symmetrically increased both peaks for the transparent paradigm (F). These stimulus-specific changes were compatible with the results of the direct method discussed in the text.</p>
2016-01-28 12:37:38
attentional gain modulations
attentional modulation patterns
approach
MT
Noisy Data Tuning curves
response
model selection
data-driven methods