Skip to main content
. 1996 Aug 1;16(15):4716–4732. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.16-15-04716.1996

Fig. 12.

Fig. 12.

Differences in preferred tuning direction versus GI sum. Based on the hypothesis that MSTd selectivity is invariant with regard to the form, feature, and class defining motion pattern, we predicted that any variation in preferred tuning between classes was largely a function of the inherent noisiness in cell response. Because the GI reflects response robustness, we predicted that differences in tuning would, on average, be smaller when calculated between experiments with high GIs. In this figure, by plotting the difference in preferred tuning against the sum of the GIs of the experiments compared, it can be seen that this is the case. For each plot, five types of potential comparisons are made, with the title of the plot indicating the stimulus class in common for each of these comparisons. For example, the graph at the upper left makes the comparisons RD–ES, RD–SS, RD–FL, RD–AP, and RD–NF.