A stimulus (mask) reduces the visibility of another stimulus (target) when they are presented in close spatio-temporal vicinity of each other, a phenomenon called visual masking. Visual masking has been extensively studied to understand dynamics of information processing in the visual system. In this study, we adopted a statistical point of view, rather than a mechanistic one, to investigate how mask-related activities might influence target-related ones within the context of visual masking. We modeled the distribution of response errors of human observers in three different visual masking experiments, namely para-/meta-contrast masking, pattern masking by noise, and pattern masking by structure. We adopted statistical models, which have been used previously in studies of visual short-term memory, to capture response characteristics of observers under masking conditions. We tested the following scenarios: (i) mask activity may reduce a target's signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) without interfering with its encoding precision. (ii) Mask activity may "interfere" with the encoding of a target and cause decreased precision in observer's reports. (iii) Decreased performance due to masking may result from the confusion or "misbinding" of a mask's features with those of the target, when they are similar as in the case of pattern masking by structure. Our results show that in all three types of masking, the reduction of a target's SNR was the primary process whereby masking occurred. A significant decrease, correlated with masking strength, in the precision of the target's encoding was observed in para-/meta-contrast and pattern masking by structure, but not in pattern masking by noise. We interpret these findings as the mask reducing the target's SNR (i) by suppressing or interrupting the signal of the target in para-/meta-contrast, (ii) by increasing noise in pattern masking by noise, and (iii) a combination of the two in pattern masking by structure.
We propose that spatial fixation patterns in strabismus can be accounted for in a decision framework wherein the oculomotor system has access to retinal error information from each eye and the brain chooses between them to prepare a saccade. For target locations approximately midway between the two foveae, strength of retinal error representations from each eye is almost equal, leading to trial-to-trial variability in choice of fixating eye.
Stimuli that are briefly presented around the time of saccades are often perceived with spatiotemporal distortions. These distortions do not always have deleterious effects on the visibility and identification of a stimulus. Recent studies reported that when a stimulus is the target of an intended saccade, it is released from both masking (De Pisapia, Kaunitz, & Melcher, 2010) and crowding (Harrison, Mattingley, & Remington, 2013). Here, we investigated pre-saccadic changes in single and crowded letter recognition performance in the absence (Experiment 1) and the presence (Experiment 2) of backward masks to determine the extent to which saccadic “uncrowding” and “unmasking” mechanisms are similar. Our results show that pre-saccadic improvements in letter recognition performance are mostly due to the presence of masks and/or stimulus transients which occur after the target is presented. More importantly, we did not find any decrease in crowding strength before impending saccades. A simplified version of a dual-channel neural model, originally proposed to explain masking phenomena, with several saccadic add-on mechanisms, could account for our results in Experiment 1. However, this model falls short in explaining how saccades drastically reduced the effect of backward masking (Experiment 2). The addition of a remapping mechanism that alters the relative spatial positions of stimuli was needed to fully account for the improvements observed when backward masks followed the letter stimuli. Taken together, our results (i) are inconsistent with saccadic uncrowding, (ii) strongly support saccadic unmasking, and (iii) suggest that pre-saccadic letter recognition is modulated by multiple perisaccadic mechanisms with different time courses.
Objects in clutter are difficult to recognize, a phenomenon known as crowding. There is little consensus on the underlying mechanisms of crowding, and a large number of models have been proposed. There have also been attempts at unifying the explanations of crowding under a single model, such as the weighted feature model of Harrison and Bex (2015) and the texture synthesis model of Rosenholtz and colleagues (Balas, Nakano, & Rosenholtz, 2009; Keshvari & Rosenholtz, 2016). The goal of this work was to test various models of crowding and to assess whether a unifying account can be developed. Adopting Harrison and Bex's (2015) experimental paradigm, we asked observers to report the orientation of two concentric C-stimuli. Contrary to the predictions of their model, observers' recognition accuracy was worse for the inner C-stimulus. In addition, we demonstrated that the stimulus paradigm used by Harrison and Bex has a crucial confounding factor, eccentricity, which limits its usage to a very narrow range of stimulus parameters. Nevertheless, reporting the orientations of both C-stimuli in this paradigm proved very useful in pitting different crowding models against each other. Specifically, we tested deterministic and probabilistic versions of averaging, substitution, and attentional resolution models as well as the texture synthesis model. None of the models alone was able to explain the entire set of data. Based on these findings, we discuss whether the explanations of crowding can (should) be unified.
The spatial representation of a visual scene in the early visual system is well known. The optics of the eye map the three-dimensional environment onto two-dimensional images on the retina. These retinotopic representations are preserved in the early visual system. Retinotopic representations and processing are among the most prevalent concepts in visual neuroscience. However, it has long been known that a retinotopic representation of the stimulus is neither sufficient nor necessary for perception. Saccadic Stimulus Presentation Paradigm and the Ternus-Pikler displays have been used to investigate non-retinotopic processes with and without eye movements, respectively. However, neither of these paradigms eliminates the retinotopic representation of the spatial layout of the stimulus. Here, we investigated how stimulus features are processed in the absence of a retinotopic layout and in the presence of retinotopic conflict. We used anorthoscopic viewing (slit viewing) and pitted a retinotopic feature-processing hypothesis against a non-retinotopic feature-processing hypothesis. Our results support the predictions of the non-retinotopic feature-processing hypothesis and demonstrate the ability of the visual system to operate non-retinotopically at a fine feature processing level in the absence of a retinotopic spatial layout. Our results suggest that perceptual space is actively constructed from the perceptual dimension of motion. The implications of these findings for normal ecological viewing conditions are discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.