2012
DOI: 10.1152/jn.00471.2012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Potential confounds in estimating trial-to-trial correlations between neuronal response and behavior using choice probabilities

Abstract: Correlations between trial-to-trial fluctuations in the responses of individual sensory neurons and perceptual reports, commonly quantified with choice probability (CP), have been widely used as an important tool for assessing the contributions of neurons to behavior. These correlations are usually weak and often require a large number of trials for a reliable estimate. Therefore, working with measures such as CP warrants care in data analysis as well as rigorous controls during data collection. Here we identi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
53
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 55 publications
(57 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
4
53
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Although they used a different approach, the choice-related information plots for the individual MT neurons of Ghose and Harrison (2009) are very similar to our narrow matched filters with variable latency shown in Figure 4C. However, it is important to note that none of these studies, including ours, is immune to potential confounds, such as non-stationarity of neural and behavioral responses, which can bias aROC scores (Kang & Maunsell, 2012).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 51%
“…Although they used a different approach, the choice-related information plots for the individual MT neurons of Ghose and Harrison (2009) are very similar to our narrow matched filters with variable latency shown in Figure 4C. However, it is important to note that none of these studies, including ours, is immune to potential confounds, such as non-stationarity of neural and behavioral responses, which can bias aROC scores (Kang & Maunsell, 2012).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 51%
“…Grand CPs were obtained for each 3-D structureselective site by first z-scoring the neuronal data within each condition (with ≥5 trials per choice and an RT of ≥150 msec; no 100% stereo coherence conditions) and subsequently combining, that is, bringing all z-scored data into one data set, the z-scored data from different conditions to calculate the grand CP. z-Scoring followed the method proposed by Kang and Maunsell (2012), giving a grand CP corrected for biases that occur due to unbalanced samples. We examined the time course of the grand CP using a sliding window analysis in which the grand CP was calculated for the neuronal data contained in a 100-msec time window that was advanced in time in steps of 10 msec.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…SNR: 0.53; Adab & Vogels, 2011), a trend that failed to reach statistical significance (Mann-Whitney U test, p = .2). Applying the correction procedure proposed by Kang and Maunsell (2012) for unbalanced ratios of behavioral choices across stimulus conditions yielded somewhat larger grand CPs for PIT (mean = 0.56; n = 81).…”
Section: Pit Responses In the Coarse Orientation Discrimination Taskmentioning
confidence: 97%