Elisabeth Parés Pujolràs
@epares.bsky.social
170 followers 370 following 18 posts
Cognitive Neuroscience postdoc @ucddublin, previously @UCL_ICN. Interested in the science & philosophy of decision making, voluntary action and consciousness.
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
Reposted by Elisabeth Parés Pujolràs
francoisstock.bsky.social
Our #sEEG study is now published in Nature Communications: rdcu.be/eIkoG! 🧠
Key finding: We discovered neural evidence accumulation for visual perception that's independent of report preparation—recorded from >3000 channels across 3 experiments!
#Neuroscience #Consciousness #OpenAccess
epares.bsky.social
Overall, our results highlight how prominent neural decision signals may take different shapes in different contexts, and how probing them using tasks that depart from conventional ones can provide important insights into their functional roles. Thanks for reading this far!
epares.bsky.social
A simple bounded accumulation model could capture the key behavioural patterns in our data, and model-based simulations were able to reproduce the condition-specific profiles of the neural data (CPP & MBL) following each pulse 👇
Model-based simulated EEG data
epares.bsky.social
Our participants sometimes terminated decisions early, tending to use the second pulse less than the first one, and CPP amplitudes following each pulse reflected this differential weight on choice (i.e. small CPP, small weight on choice), also capturing condition-specific differences in the effect.
epares.bsky.social
This transient pattern of activity stands in contrast to motor beta lateralisation (MBL), which keeps track of the total sum of accumulated evidence throughout the intervals between pulses and until response.
epares.bsky.social
We show that when noisy evidence for a single decision comes in temporally separate pulses, the centroparietal positivity (CPP) tracks multiple rounds of evidence accumulation, falling back down to baseline during the intervals in between pulses when no relevant info is presented.
epares.bsky.social
Check out our reviewed preprint, now out in eLife!
With @spk3lly.bsky.social, @redmondoconnell.bsky.social and Anna Geuzebroek

elifesciences.org/reviewed-pre...

While we work on improving the [solid] paper based on the reviews, here are the key take-home messages:
Perceptual glimpses are locally accumulated and globally maintained at distinct processing levels
elifesciences.org
Reposted by Elisabeth Parés Pujolràs
Reposted by Elisabeth Parés Pujolràs
gweindel.bsky.social
Will you be at #ICON2025 in Porto?
Then drop at our symposium on "Decision Signal(s) In The Electro-encephalogram" (SY23, Thursday at 13.45) with @redmondoconnell.bsky.social @nunezanalyzed.bsky.social @tarrynbalsdon.bsky.social @hcp4715.bsky.social organized by Leendert van Maanen and Jelmer Borst
epares.bsky.social
Excited to be in Porto for #ICON2025! I will be at poster session 2 tomorrow (Tuesday) afternoon (P2.20) talking about evidence accumulation and choice-encoding centroparietal signals in the human EEG. Come say hi!
Reposted by Elisabeth Parés Pujolràs
mbaborebelo.bsky.social
📢Fully Funded PhD position in Barcelona!

I'm excited to announce that I’m opening a PhD position at @idibaps.bsky.social, Barcelona!
We'll investigate the role of bodily signals in autobiographical memory, using virtual reality, EEG and TMS, in healthy volunteers and patient populations.
epares.bsky.social
Excellent piece.

We know how to improve writing ability: it's by doing more, not less of it.

"LLMs do not improve one’s writing ability much like taking a taxi does not improve one’s driving ability. Students should hone their writing, thinking, and other academic skills at every opportunity."
olivia.science
Finally! 🤩 Our position piece: Against the Uncritical Adoption of 'AI' Technologies in Academia:
doi.org/10.5281/zeno...

We unpick the tech industry’s marketing, hype, & harm; and we argue for safeguarding higher education, critical
thinking, expertise, academic freedom, & scientific integrity.
1/n
Abstract: Under the banner of progress, products have been uncritically adopted or
even imposed on users — in past centuries with tobacco and combustion engines, and in
the 21st with social media. For these collective blunders, we now regret our involvement or
apathy as scientists, and society struggles to put the genie back in the bottle. Currently, we
are similarly entangled with artificial intelligence (AI) technology. For example, software updates are rolled out seamlessly and non-consensually, Microsoft Office is bundled with chatbots, and we, our students, and our employers have had no say, as it is not
considered a valid position to reject AI technologies in our teaching and research. This
is why in June 2025, we co-authored an Open Letter calling on our employers to reverse
and rethink their stance on uncritically adopting AI technologies. In this position piece,
we expound on why universities must take their role seriously toa) counter the technology
industry’s marketing, hype, and harm; and to b) safeguard higher education, critical
thinking, expertise, academic freedom, and scientific integrity. We include pointers to
relevant work to further inform our colleagues. Figure 1. A cartoon set theoretic view on various terms (see Table 1) used when discussing the superset AI
(black outline, hatched background): LLMs are in orange; ANNs are in magenta; generative models are
in blue; and finally, chatbots are in green. Where these intersect, the colours reflect that, e.g. generative adversarial network (GAN) and Boltzmann machine (BM) models are in the purple subset because they are
both generative and ANNs. In the case of proprietary closed source models, e.g. OpenAI’s ChatGPT and
Apple’s Siri, we cannot verify their implementation and so academics can only make educated guesses (cf.
Dingemanse 2025). Undefined terms used above: BERT (Devlin et al. 2019); AlexNet (Krizhevsky et al.
2017); A.L.I.C.E. (Wallace 2009); ELIZA (Weizenbaum 1966); Jabberwacky (Twist 2003); linear discriminant analysis (LDA); quadratic discriminant analysis (QDA). Table 1. Below some of the typical terminological disarray is untangled. Importantly, none of these terms
are orthogonal nor do they exclusively pick out the types of products we may wish to critique or proscribe. Protecting the Ecosystem of Human Knowledge: Five Principles
Reposted by Elisabeth Parés Pujolràs
intlbrainlab.bsky.social
Two flagship papers from the International Brain Laboratory, now out in ‪@Nature.com‬:
🧠 Brain-wide map of neural activity during complex behaviour: doi.org/10.1038/s41586-025-09235-0
🧠 Brain-wide representations of prior information in mouse decision-making: doi.org/10.1038/s41586-025-09226-1 +
Reposted by Elisabeth Parés Pujolràs
spk3lly.bsky.social
New paper from the lab indicates some surprising differences in visual cortical contributions to two popular VEP types.
In it, Kieran uses some of his brilliant tricks from last year's paper:
Reposted by Elisabeth Parés Pujolràs
spk3lly.bsky.social
Check out our new multisensory decision study!
We tackle a decades-old Q: does faster detection of bimodal targets come from a race or co-activation between modalities? And also a vital, orthogonal Q: is it one decision process or two?
A1: co-activation
A2: two!
Read here: rdcu.be/eASYd
Reposted by Elisabeth Parés Pujolràs
lintonvision.bsky.social
CONVERSATIONS ON CONSCIOUSNESS
How the CCN Community Can Contribute

#CCN2025 on Wednesday 13th (10am 🇪🇺)
Livestream link below

➡️ Exploring the possibility of Computational Consciousness Science

➡️ Discussing three Templeton World Charity Foundation Adversarial Collaborations
Reposted by Elisabeth Parés Pujolràs
kiemohr.bsky.social
Delighted to share this paper, now published in @arvoinfo.bsky.social. With @spk3lly.bsky.social‬ and Anna Geuzebroek we explored differences in visual cortical responses for pattern pulses and pattern reversals. Here's the link:
jov.arvojournals.org/article.aspx...
Pattern-pulses and pattern-reversals evoke different cascades of cortical sources in the multifocal visual evoked potential | JOV | ARVO Journals
jov.arvojournals.org
Reposted by Elisabeth Parés Pujolràs
connelllab.bsky.social
1/3 Check out our new commentary bsky.app/profile/imag....
imagingneurosci.bsky.social
New paper in Imaging Neuroscience by Redmond G. O’Connell, Simon P. Kelly, et al:

Regressing away common neural choice signals does not make them artifacts: Comment on Frömer et al. 2024

doi.org/10.1162/IMAG...
epares.bsky.social
We believe our results hint at a flexible neural architecture that can adapt to different decision contexts, and highlight how the CPP may play a key intermediary role in adaptive evidence accumulation. Stay tuned for upcoming related work, and thanks for reading!
epares.bsky.social
The way that the CPP behaves in this task seems very different from its well-established characteristics in static contexts with continuous evidence (e.g. classic random dot motion tasks), where it reflects the absolute cumulative sum of evidence.
epares.bsky.social
Further, we found that the centroparietal positivity (CPP) tracks effective evidence (i.e. it reflects how much a DV changes following a token, rather than just stimulus information), but it does not keep a sustained representation of the DV.