Skip to main content

Umbrella menu

  • SfN.org
  • eNeuro
  • The Journal of Neuroscience
  • Neuronline
  • BrainFacts.org

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Latest Articles
    • Issue Archive
    • Editorials
    • Research Highlights
  • TOPICS
    • Cognition and Behavior
    • Development
    • Disorders of the Nervous System
    • History, Teaching and Public Awareness
    • Integrative Systems
    • Neuronal Excitability
    • Novel Tools and Methods
    • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • BLOG
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
  • SfN.org
  • eNeuro
  • The Journal of Neuroscience
  • Neuronline
  • BrainFacts.org

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
eNeuro
  • My alerts

eNeuro

Advanced Search

Submit a Manuscript
  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Latest Articles
    • Issue Archive
    • Editorials
    • Research Highlights
  • TOPICS
    • Cognition and Behavior
    • Development
    • Disorders of the Nervous System
    • History, Teaching and Public Awareness
    • Integrative Systems
    • Neuronal Excitability
    • Novel Tools and Methods
    • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • BLOG
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
PreviousNext
Commentary, Cognition and Behavior

Inverted Encoding Models Assay Population-Level Stimulus Representations, Not Single-Unit Neural Tuning

Thomas C. Sprague, Kirsten C. S. Adam, Joshua J. Foster, Masih Rahmati, David W. Sutterer and Vy A. Vo
eNeuro 11 May 2018, 5 (3) ENEURO.0098-18.2018; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0098-18.2018
Thomas C. Sprague
1Department of Psychology, New York University, New York, NY 10003
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Thomas C. Sprague
Kirsten C. S. Adam
2Department of Psychology and Institute for Mind and Biology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Kirsten C. S. Adam
Joshua J. Foster
2Department of Psychology and Institute for Mind and Biology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Joshua J. Foster
Masih Rahmati
1Department of Psychology, New York University, New York, NY 10003
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
David W. Sutterer
2Department of Psychology and Institute for Mind and Biology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for David W. Sutterer
Vy A. Vo
3Neurosciences Graduate Program, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Vy A. Vo
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1.

    IEM: use neural tuning as an assumption to estimate population-level representations. A, The IEM framework assumes that aggregate neural responses (e.g., voxels) can be modeled as a combination of feature-selective information channels (i.e., orientation-selective neural populations). Tuning properties of modeled information channels are experimenter defined and often based on findings in the single-unit physiology literature. B, Once an encoding model (A) is defined, it can be used to predict how each information channel should respond to each stimulus in the experiment. These predicted channel responses are used to fit the encoding model to each voxel’s activation across all trials in a “training” dataset, often balanced across experimental conditions, or derived from a separate “localizer” or “mapping” task. C, By inverting the encoding models estimated across all voxels (typically, within an independently-defined region), new activation patterns can be used to compute the response of each modeled neural information channel. This step transforms activation patterns from measurement space (one number per measurement dimension, e.g., voxel) to information space (one number per modeled information channel, A). These computed channel response functions can be aligned based on the known stimulus feature value on each trial (black arrowheads), and quantified and compared across conditions (e.g., manipulations of stimulus contrast, spatial attention, etc.), especially when a fixed encoding model is used for reconstruction (as schematized here). Cartoon data shown throughout figure.

Back to top

In this issue

eneuro: 5 (3)
eNeuro
Vol. 5, Issue 3
May/June 2018
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for sharing this eNeuro article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Inverted Encoding Models Assay Population-Level Stimulus Representations, Not Single-Unit Neural Tuning
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from eNeuro
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in eNeuro.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
View Full Page PDF
Citation Tools
Inverted Encoding Models Assay Population-Level Stimulus Representations, Not Single-Unit Neural Tuning
Thomas C. Sprague, Kirsten C. S. Adam, Joshua J. Foster, Masih Rahmati, David W. Sutterer, Vy A. Vo
eNeuro 11 May 2018, 5 (3) ENEURO.0098-18.2018; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0098-18.2018

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Share
Inverted Encoding Models Assay Population-Level Stimulus Representations, Not Single-Unit Neural Tuning
Thomas C. Sprague, Kirsten C. S. Adam, Joshua J. Foster, Masih Rahmati, David W. Sutterer, Vy A. Vo
eNeuro 11 May 2018, 5 (3) ENEURO.0098-18.2018; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0098-18.2018
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Significance Statement
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
    • Synthesis
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • cognitive Vision
  • computational neuroimaging
  • fMRI
  • inverted encoding model

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

Commentary

  • Promisomics and the Short-Circuiting of Mind
  • Against the Epistemological Primacy of the Hardware: The Brain from Inside Out, Turned Upside Down
  • A Differential Effect of Lovastatin versus Simvastatin in Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Show more Commentary

Cognition and Behavior

  • Promisomics and the Short-Circuiting of Mind
  • Against the Epistemological Primacy of the Hardware: The Brain from Inside Out, Turned Upside Down
  • A Differential Effect of Lovastatin versus Simvastatin in Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Show more Cognition and Behavior

Subjects

  • Cognition and Behavior
  • Commentaries
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Latest Articles
  • Issue Archive
  • Blog
  • Browse by Topic

Information

  • For Authors
  • For the Media

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact
  • Feedback
(eNeuro logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2021 by the Society for Neuroscience.
eNeuro eISSN: 2373-2822

The ideas and opinions expressed in eNeuro do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the eNeuro Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in eNeuro should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in eNeuro.