Defining the cortical visual systems: “What”, “Where”, and “How”

Creem, Sarah H.; Proffítt, Dennis R.

doi:10.1016/s0001-6918(01)00021-x

Cited by 190 publications

(110 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

104

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Hence, regardless of the task required, some aspects of object perception appear to be involved in the analysis of object properties. As Creem & Proffitt (2001) point out, this type of object analysis appears to be distinct from an analysis performed in the ventral temporal and lateral-occipital cortex and is more consistent with theories that there is some objectbased analysis in the dorsal stream (Jeannerod, 1997;Milner & Goodale, 1995;Creem-Regehr & Lee, 2005).…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 78%

TMS can reveal contrasting functions of the dorsal and ventral visual processing streams

Ellison

Cowey

2006

Exp Brain Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. (2006) 'TMS can reveal contrasting functions of the dorsal and ventral visual processing streams.', Experimental brain research., 175 (4). pp. 618-625. Further information on publisher's website:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-006-0582-8Publisher's copyright statement:The original publication is available at www.springerlink.com Additional information: Use policyThe full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-pro t purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. Abstract:In order to investigate the functional specificity of the dorsal and ventral visual processing steams we used transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to briefly disrupt one or the other while subjects performed three tasks, involving discrimination of colour or shape or relative position. TMS was delivered over right posterior parietal cortex (PPC) or right lateral occipital (LO) cortex, regions known to have visuospatial and object processing properties respectively. LO but not PPC stimulation had a significant effect on reaction time when subjects were asked to make a discrimination of relative shape. PPC stimulation had a significant effect when subjects were asked to discriminate relative position of the same shapes. Stimulation of LO also lengthened reaction times on the position task. There were no effects of stimulation at either site on colour discrimination. Results are discussed within the framework of how the dorsal stream and ventral stream are dissociated following their damage in neurological patients and possible ways in which they may interact in the normal brain.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 78%

TMS can reveal contrasting functions of the dorsal and ventral visual processing streams

Ellison

Cowey

2006

Exp Brain Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the neural processing is not necessarily the same in the two cases. Our results, like the results reviewed in Creem and Proffitt (2001), fit into a "how-where" picture of the dorsal stream's role in visual processing and into the related suggestions of Rizzolatti and Matelli (2003), who summarized new evidence and proposed that the dorsal stream forms two distinct functional systems: a dorso-dorsal stream for online control of action, and a dorso-ventral stream that plays a crucial role in space perception and in action understanding. They also fit into Jeannerod's analysis of the parietal lobe's participation in both space perception and visually guided sensorimotor behavior (Jeannerod, 1997;see Jacob & Jeannerod, 2003, for a summary and review).…”

Section: Short-lived Representation Of the Body In Egocentric Space Psupporting

confidence: 87%

Short-lived effects of a visual inducer during egocentric space perception and manual behavior

Matin

2013

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A pitched visual inducer has a strong effect on the visually perceived elevation of a target in extrapersonal space, and also on the elevation of the arm when a subject points with an unseen arm to the target's elevation. The manual effect is a systematic function of hand-to-body distance (Li and Matin Vision Research 45:533-550, 2005): When the arm is fully extended, manual responses to perceptually mislocalized luminous targets are veridical; when the arm is close to the body, gross matching errors occur. In the present experiments, we measured this hand-to-body distance effect during the presence of a pitched visual inducer and after inducer offset, using three values of hand-to-body distance (0, 40, and 70 cm) and two open-loop tasks (pointing to the perceived elevation of a target at true eye level and setting the height of the arm to match the elevation). We also measured manual behavior when subjects were instructed to point horizontally under induction and after inducer offset (no visual target at any time). In all cases, the hand-to-body distance effect disappeared shortly after inducer offset. We suggest that the rapid disappearance of the distance effect is a manifestation of processes in the dorsal visual stream that are involved in updating short-lived representations of the arm in egocentric visual perception and manual behavior.

show abstract

“…Additional experiments with proper controls for these motor effects and with different orientations of the stimulus presentation surface are needed to disentangle these factors (see Experiment 2, Method). As the effect of target position did not occur during visual trials, it may be taken as evidence for a difference in information processing that depends on the nature of the task: if a motor response is involved, observers may attend to egocentrically defined spatial information more than for a verbal response (Bridgeman, Lewis, Heit, & Nagle, 1979;Creem & Proffitt, 2001;Goodale, 2011;Milner & Goodale, 2006). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Titchener’s ⊥ in context 1—delimited, discrete monomotif patterns, line arrangements, and branching patterns

Landwehr

2015

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three experiments tested the effects of the presence of nontarget ⊥s on Titchener's (1901) ⊥-illusion. Experiment 1 used patterns of four separate ⊥s, Experiment 2 used branching patterns in which four ⊥s were stuck together, and Experiment 3 used patterns of four triangles or four beehive forms for which the ⊥ could be seen as a skeleton. Three independent samples of 12 observers each had to haptically indicate the lengths of target lines and verbally judge the relative lengths of the two lines of target ⊥s. The illusion to judge or indicate the ⊥'s undivided line as longer than its divided line survived throughout except for the branching patterns: here, haptic indications did not differ between the two types of lines. Specific features of these patterns and of the ⊥ itself may be responsible for these effects.

show abstract

Defining the cortical visual systems: “What”, “Where”, and “How”

Cited by 190 publications

References 72 publications

TMS can reveal contrasting functions of the dorsal and ventral visual processing streams

TMS can reveal contrasting functions of the dorsal and ventral visual processing streams

Short-lived effects of a visual inducer during egocentric space perception and manual behavior

Titchener’s ⊥ in context 1—delimited, discrete monomotif patterns, line arrangements, and branching patterns

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About