Fast saccadic and manual responses to faces presented to the koniocellular visual pathway

Abstract

The parallel pathways of the human visual system differ in their tuning to luminance, color, and spatial frequency. These attunements recently have been shown to propagate to differential processing of higher-order stimuli, facial threat cues, in the magnocellular (M) and parvocellular (P) pathways, with greater sensitivity to clear and ambiguous threat, respectively. The role of the third, koniocellular (K) pathway in facial threat processing, however, remains unknown. To address this gap in knowledge, we briefly presented peripheral face stimuli psychophysically biased towards M, P, or K pathways. Observers were instructed to report via a key-press whether the face was angry or neutral while their eye movements and manual responses were recorded. We found that short-latency saccades were made more frequently to faces presented in the K channel than to P or M channels. Saccade latencies were not significantly modulated by expressive and identity cues. In contrast, manual response latencies and accuracy were modulated by both pathway biasing and by interactions of facial expression with facial masculinity, such that angry male faces elicited the fastest, and angry female faces, the least accurate, responses. We conclude that face stimuli can evoke fast saccadic and manual responses when projected to the K pathway.

A deep neural network model of the primate superior colliculus for emotion recognition

“…M-biased stimuli consist of achromatic/heteroluminant faces (i.e. greyscale and low-luminance contrast), whereas P-biased stimuli are heterochromatic/isoluminant images created by converting greyscale faces to individually calibrated isoluminant intensities of red and green [ 94 , 95 ]. M-biased faces have been proven to affect behavioural tasks engaging the SC (e.g.…”

Americans weigh an attended emotion more than Koreans in overall mood judgments

“…We varied the ratio between happy and angry faces at seven levels: 1:7, 2:6, 3:5, 4:4, 5:3, 6:2, and 7:1. Importantly, while the overall facial expressions varied, we maintained a constant ratio of female and male faces to control the potential interaction of gender and facial expression 40,41 . When the number of happy faces was even (e.g., 2:6, 4:4, 6:2), the face crowds always consisted of the same number of happy women and men.…”