2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2009.06.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Expectation (and attention) in visual cognition

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

41
628
1
3

Year Published

2010
2010
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 789 publications
(674 citation statements)
references
References 72 publications
41
628
1
3
Order By: Relevance
“…This cluster corresponds broadly with the dorsal frontoparietal network for endogenous control of spatial attention (Corbetta & Shulman, 2002). As noted previously (Summerfield & Egner, 2009) differentiating the effects of prediction and attention is quite difficult. However, Kok et al (2012) demonstrated it is possible to differentiate the two by showing that predictable stimuli (in visual cortex) tend to produce less activity when the stream is unattended, but greater activity when the stream is attended to.…”
Section: Location Regularitiessupporting
confidence: 59%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This cluster corresponds broadly with the dorsal frontoparietal network for endogenous control of spatial attention (Corbetta & Shulman, 2002). As noted previously (Summerfield & Egner, 2009) differentiating the effects of prediction and attention is quite difficult. However, Kok et al (2012) demonstrated it is possible to differentiate the two by showing that predictable stimuli (in visual cortex) tend to produce less activity when the stream is unattended, but greater activity when the stream is attended to.…”
Section: Location Regularitiessupporting
confidence: 59%
“…Our work assumes that environmental statistics are vital information for systems that mediate predictive coding -a computation in which systems associated with higher level functions generate predictions about expected environmental states -that is, construct a model of expected neural activity in low-level sensory regions (Friston, 2009;Grossberg, 2009;Rao & Ballard, 1999;Summerfield & Egner, 2009). Satisfied -i.e., correct --predictions are associated with reduced prediction errors, and lower activity in sensory regions (Feldman & Friston, 2010;Kok, Rahnev, Jehee, Lau, & de Lange, 2012).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recent evidence supports the notion that information processing in the visual system can be accounted for by PC mechanisms [5][6][7][8] . In PC information is processed in hierarchically organized sensory systems, with the overarching functional property of the brain being the explanation of incoming sensory information with probabilistically the most parsimonious or efficient model 9,10 .…”
supporting
confidence: 53%
“…Using multivariate pattern analysis, Jiang and colleagues show that attention enhances the precision of ɛ in FFA, due to an improvement of the stimulus representation in this area. Overall, the computation of fulfilled or violated expectations requires the attention of the observers (Larsson & Smith, 2012), meaning that attention is a precondition for discriminating expected from unexpected stimuli (for a summary of attention and prediction processes see the review by Summerfield & Egner, 2009). …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%