Although masked stem priming (e.g., dealer-DEAL) is one of the most established effects in visual word identification, it is less clear whether primes and targets sharing a suffix (e.g., kindness-WILDNESS) also yield facilitation. In a new take on this issue, we show that prime nonwords facilitate lexical decisions to target words ending with the same suffix (sheeter-TEACHER) compared to a condition where the critical suffix was substituted by another one (sheetal-TEACHER) or by an unrelated nonmorphological ending (sheetub-TEACHER). We also show that this effect is genuinely morphological, as no priming emerged in noncomplex items with the same orthographic characteristics (sportel-BROTHEL vs. sportic-BROTHEL vs. sportur-BROTHEL). In a further experiment, we took advantage of these results to assess whether suffixes are recognized in a position-specific fashion. Masked suffix priming did not emerge when the relative order of stems and suffixes was reversed in the prime nonwordsersheet did not yield any time saving in the identification of teacher as compared to either alsheet or obsheet. We take these results to show that-er was not identified as a morpheme in ersheet, thus indicating that suffix identification is position specific. This conclusion is in line with data on interference effects in nonword rejection and strongly constrains theoretical proposals on how complex words are identified. In particular, because these findings were reported in a masked priming paradigm, they suggest that positional constraints operate early, most likely at a prelexical level of morpho-orthographic analysis.

The extraction of optic flow cues is fundamental for successful locomotion. During forward motion, the focus of expansion (FoE), in conjunction with knowledge of eye position, indicates the direction in which the individual is heading. Therefore, it is expected that cortical brain regions that are involved in the estimation of heading will be sensitive to this feature. To characterize cortical sensitivity to the location of the FoE or, more generally, the center of flow (CoF) during visually simulated self-motion, we carried out a functional MRI (fMRI) adaptation experiment in several human visual cortical areas that are thought to be sensitive to optic flow parameters, namely, V3A, V6, MT/V5, and MST. In each trial, two optic flow patterns were sequentially presented, with the CoF located in either the same or different positions. With an adaptation design, an area sensitive to heading direction should respond more strongly to a pair of stimuli with different CoFs than to stimuli with the same CoF. Our results show such release from adaptation in areas MT/V5 and MST, and to a lesser extent V3A, suggesting the involvement of these areas in the processing of heading direction. The effect could not be explained either by differences in local motion or by attention capture. It was not observed to a significant extent in area V6 or in control area V1. The different patterns of responses observed in MST and V6, areas that are both involved in the processing of egomotion in macaques and humans, suggest distinct roles in the processing of visual cues for self-motion.

Human visual area V6, in the parieto-occipital sulcus, is thought to have an important role in the extraction of optic flow for the monitoring and guidance of self-motion (egomotion) because it responds differentially to egomotion-compatible optic flow when compared to: (a) coherent but egomotion-incompatible flow (Cardin & Smith, 2010), and (b) incoherent motion (Pitzalis et al., 2010). It is not clear, however, whether V6 responds more strongly to egomotion-incompatible global motion than to incoherent motion. This is relevant not only for determining the functional properties of V6, but also in order to choose optimal stimuli for localising V6 accurately with fMRI. Localisation with retinotopic mapping is difficult and there is a need for a simple, reliable method. We conducted an event-related 3T fMRI experiment in which participants viewed a display of dots which either: a) followed a time-varying optic flow trajectory in a single, egomotion-compatible (EC) display; b) formed an egomotion-incompatible (EI) 3×3 array of optic flow patches; or c) moved randomly (RM). Results from V6 show an ordering of response magnitudes: EC > EI > RM. Neighbouring areas V3A and V7 responded more strongly to EC than to RM, but about equally to EC and EI. Our results suggest that although V6 may have a general role in the extraction of global motion, in clear contrast to neighbouring motion areas it is especially concerned with encoding EC stimuli. They suggest two strategies for localising V6: (1) contrasting EC and EI; or (2) contrasting EC and RM, which is more sensitive but carries a risk of including voxels from neighbouring regions that also show a EC > RM preference.

No abstract