JN Fuel your research with LabChart
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol 97: 2722-2730, 2007. First published January 31, 2007; doi:10.1152/jn.01238.2006
0022-3077/07 $8.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
97/4/2722    most recent
01238.2006v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (3)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Oswal, A.
Right arrow Articles by Carpenter, R.H.S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Oswal, A.
Right arrow Articles by Carpenter, R.H.S.

The Time Course of Stimulus Expectation in a Saccadic Decision Task

A. Oswal, Miriam Ogden and R.H.S. Carpenter

The Physiological Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom

Submitted 27 November 2006; accepted in final form 26 January 2007

Because the time to respond to a stimulus depend markedly on expectation, measurements of reaction time can, conversely, provide information about the brain's estimate of the probability of a stimulus. Previous studies have shown that the quantitative relationship between reaction time and static, long-term expectation or prior probability can be explained economically by the LATER model of decision reaction time. What is not known, however, is how the neural representation of expectation changes in the short term, as a result of immediate cues. Here, we manipulate the foreperiod—the delay between the start of a trial and the appearance of the stimulus—to see how saccadic latency, and thus expectation, varies with different delays. It appears that LATER can provide a quantitative explanation of this relationship, in terms both of average latencies and of their statistical distribution. We also show that expectancy appears to be subject to a process of low-pass filtering, analogous to the spatial blur that degrades visual acuity.


Address for reprint requests and other correspondence: R.H.S. Carpenter, The Physiological Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 3EG, UK (E-mail: rhsc1{at}cam.ac.uk)




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
P. Boulinguez, M. Jaffard, L. Granjon, and A. Benraiss
Warning Signals Induce Automatic EMG Activations and Proactive Volitional Inhibition: Evidence From Analysis of Error Distribution in Simple RT
J Neurophysiol, March 1, 2008; 99(3): 1572 - 1578.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2007 by the The American Physiological Society.