Masking interrupts figure-ground signals in V1

Lamme, Victor A. F.; Zipser, Karl; Spekreijse, H.

doi:10.1167/1.3.32

Cited by 75 publications

(98 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As the stimuli and the stimulus presentation times were the same in both conditions (mask and poor mask), the improved detection performance in the poor masking condition can be attributed to feedback. Although feedback is not critical for stimulus detection, this idea supports the theory on backward masking by recurrent processing (Lamme et al 2002;Di Lollo et al 2000). Fig.…”

Section: Model Versus Human Performancesupporting

confidence: 81%

Stimulus detection after interruption of the feedforward response in a backward masking paradigm

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In backward masking, a target stimulus is rendered invisible by the presentation of a second stimulus, the mask. When the mask is effective, neural responses to the target are suppressed. Nevertheless, weak target responses sometimes may produce a behavioural response. It remains unclear whether the reduced target response is a purely feedforward response or that it includes recurrent activity. Using a feedforward neural network of biological plausible spiking neurons, we tested whether a transient spike burst is sufficient for face categorization. After training the network, the system achieved face/non-face categorization for sets of grayscale images. In a backward masking paradigm, the transient burst response was cut off thereby reducing the feedforward target response. Despite the suppressed feedforward responses stimulus classification remained robust. Thus according to our model data stimulus detection is possible with purely, suppressed feedforward responses.

show abstract

Section: Model Versus Human Performancesupporting

confidence: 81%

Stimulus detection after interruption of the feedforward response in a backward masking paradigm

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In fact, they even report that some participants in their study could reliably detect targets in the absence of visual awareness, resembling a blindsight-like condition. We propose that the poor overall quality of visual information may have triggered the perceptual decision network to start accumulating evidence as soon as sensory information became available, instead of waiting for a more precise representation that does not become available as a result of masking (Fahrenfort et al, 2007;Lamme, Zipser, & Spekreijse, 2002).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Act Quickly, Decide Later: Long-latency Visual Processing Underlies Perceptual Decisions but Not Reflexive Behavior

Jolij¹,

Scholte

Gaal

et al. 2011

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract■ Humans largely guide their behavior by their visual representation of the world. Recent studies have shown that visual information can trigger behavior within 150 msec, suggesting that visually guided responses to external events, in fact, precede conscious awareness of those events. However, is such a view correct? By using a texture discrimination task, we show that the brain relies on long-latency visual processing in order to guide perceptual decisions. Decreasing stimulus saliency leads to selective changes in long-latency visually evoked potential components reflecting scene segmentation. These latency changes are accompanied by almost equal changes in simple RTs and points of subjective simultaneity. Furthermore, we find a strong correlation between individual RTs and the latencies of scene segmentation related components in the visually evoked potentials, showing that the processes underlying these late brain potentials are critical in triggering a response. However, using the same texture stimuli in an antisaccade task, we found that reflexive, but erroneous, prosaccades, but not antisaccades, can be triggered by earlier visual processes. In other words: The brain can act quickly, but decides late. Differences between our study and earlier findings suggesting that action precedes conscious awareness can be explained by assuming that task demands determine whether a fast and unconscious, or a slower and conscious, representation is used to initiate a visually guided response. ■

show abstract

“…Single-cell recordings in monkeys (Super, Spekreijse, & Lamme, 2001) and TMS (Pascual-Leone & Walsh, 2001), fMRI (Haynes, Driver, & Rees, 2005), and EEG (Fahrenfort, Scholte, & Lamme, 2007) experiments in humans have revealed that the feedforward sweep probably remains unconscious, whereas recurrent interactions trigger awareness of a stimulus (for reviews, see Dehaene et al, 2006;Lamme, 2006). Interestingly, masking probably disrupts feedback activations but leaves feedforward activations relatively intact (Del Cul, Baillet, & Dehaene, 2007;Fahrenfort et al, 2007;Lamme, Zipser, & Spekreijse, 2002).…”

Section: Underlying Neural Mechanisms Of Conscious Versus Unconsciousmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dissociable Brain Mechanisms Underlying the Conscious and Unconscious Control of Behavior

Gaal¹,

Lamme²,

Fahrenfort³

et al. 2011

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

General rightsIt is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Disclaimer/Complaints regulationsIf you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: http://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible. Thus, the N2 likely reflects the initiation of inhibitory control, irrespective of conscious awareness. The P3 component was much reduced in amplitude and duration on masked versus unmasked stop trials. These patterns of differences and similarities between conscious and unconscious cognitive control processes are discussed in a framework that differentiates between feedforward and feedback connections in yielding conscious experience.

show abstract

Masking interrupts figure-ground signals in V1

Cited by 75 publications

References 0 publications

Stimulus detection after interruption of the feedforward response in a backward masking paradigm

Stimulus detection after interruption of the feedforward response in a backward masking paradigm

Act Quickly, Decide Later: Long-latency Visual Processing Underlies Perceptual Decisions but Not Reflexive Behavior

Dissociable Brain Mechanisms Underlying the Conscious and Unconscious Control of Behavior

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About