Figure–ground segregation requires two distinct periods of activity in V1: a transcranial magnetic stimulation study

Heinen, Klaartje; Jolij, Jacob; Lamme, Victor A. F.

doi:10.1097/01.wnr.0000175611.26485.c8

Cited by 79 publications

(73 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Ventral-temporal activation was extensive in control children, including bilateral parahippocampal regions typically activated during spatial analysis (Epstein & Kanwisher, 1998) and lateral fusiform gyri typically activated during object processing (Grill-Spector, 2003). Furthermore, control children activated primary visual cortices implicated in low-level figure-ground segregation (Heinen et al, 2005;Skiera et al, 2000) bilaterally, consistent with past EFT findings in adult controls (Ring et al, 1999). Reduced involvement of left occipital regions in ASD relative to control children suggests less reliance on lower-level visual processing.…”

supporting

confidence: 75%

Atypical neural substrates of Embedded Figures Task performance in children with Autism Spectrum Disorder

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Superior performance on the Embedded Figures Task (EFT) has been attributed to weak central coherence in perceptual processing in Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD). The present study used functional magnetic resonance imaging to examine the neural basis of EFT performance in 7-12 year old ASD children and age and IQ matched controls. ASD children activated only a subset of the distributed network of regions activated in controls. In frontal cortex, control children activated left dorsolateral, medial and dorsal premotor regions whereas ASD children only activated the dorsal premotor region. In parietal and occipital cortices, activation was bilateral in control children but unilateral (left superior parietal and right occipital) in ASD children. Further, extensive bilateral ventral temporal activation was observed in control, but not ASD children. ASD children performed the EFT at the same level as controls but with reduced cortical involvement, suggesting that disembedded visual processing is accomplished parsimoniously by ASD relative to typically developing brains.Despite deficits in multiple functional domains including social interaction, language, and executive functioning, individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) exhibit a notable strength, namely, superior ability to identify local features of complex visual stimuli (Happe & Frith, 2006). This perceptual superiority is most consistently reflected in faster and/or more accurate performance on the Embedded Figures Task (EFT), which requires identification of a simple shape embedded within a complex figure (Jolliffe & Baron-Cohen, 1997;Shah & Frith, 1983). An influential theoretical interpretation of this and similar findings on other visual-spatial tasks has been the proposal that individuals with ASD have a perceptual processing style that facilitates visual processing of local rather than global information, termed weak central coherence (Happe & Frith, 2006). Such an information processing style is consistent with symptoms of preoccupation with object parts and difficulty perceiving whole objects following changes in constituent parts (Happe & Frith, 2006). Regarding the EFT, the Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. NIH Public Access Author ManuscriptNeuroimage. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2008 October 15. NIH-PA Author ManuscriptNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript task draws upon the natural bias towards local visual processing in ASD, thereby yielding better performance in ASD than controls. In contrast, typically developing individuals are slower and/or less accu...

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 75%

Atypical neural substrates of Embedded Figures Task performance in children with Autism Spectrum Disorder

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In all experiments and analyses, earlier components of the VEP remained unaffected: Latencies of the P100 did not show any relation with RT, thus suggesting that in texture discrimination tasks, visually guided behavior depends on processes taking place approximately 175-275 msec after stimulus presentation. As argued earlier, these processes reflect scene segmentation, a process critically dependent on recurrent interactions between higher and lower visual areas, and possibly related to visual awareness Heinen et al, 2005). As previous work has shown that scene segmentation does not depend on attention, it is unlikely that changes in attentional capture can explain the pattern of results we observed (Scholte, Witteveen, Spekreijse, & Lamme, 2006;Schubö, Meinecke, & Schröger, 2001).…”

Section: Results Experiments 1: Differences In Rt Correspond To Latenccontrasting

confidence: 42%

“…Visual processing of texture checkerboards requires texture segregation, which is a two-stage process: First, borders of figures are detected, and subsequently, the figures are filled in. Border detection occurs around 80-90 msec, and is likely to be the result of lateral inhibition within cortical areas, whereas figure filling-in can take up to 200 msec and depends on re-entrant processing (Scholte, Jolij, Fahrenfort, & Lamme, 2008;Jehee, Roelfsema, Deco, Murre, & Lamme, 2007;Heinen et al, 2005;Roelfsema, Lamme, Spekreijse, & Bosch, 2002;Caputo & Casco, 1999;Lamme, 1995). This latter stage has been linked to perceptual awareness of texture stimuli, whereas the former stage could be sufficient in order to detect presence of a texture stimulus Heinen et al, 2005;Lamme, 1995Lamme, , 2003Supèr, Lamme, & Spekreijse, 2001).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, processing and extracting relevant information from visual input is a highly complex process that can take up a considerable amount of time. Recent studies have shown that it can take up to almost 400 msec before visual information is available for conscious report (e.g., Scharnowski et al, 2009;Heinen, Jolij, & Lamme, 2005). It is therefore not surprising that reacting to external events does not require awareness of those events.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

Self Cite

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

“…Physiological data also provide evidence for cross-talk between visual areas located at different hierarchical level. In fact transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) studies (22)(23)(24)(25)(26) reported that single-pulse TMS applied over primary visual areas produces significant perceptual impairment in two distinct time windows: an early one and a late one, relative to the presentation of a visual stimulus. The perception impairment caused by stimulation during the second (late) time window was interpreted as a consequence of an interference with a top-down reactivation of V1 (27,28).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatiotemporal dynamics in understanding hand—object interactions

Avanzini

Fabbri-Destro

Campi

et al. 2013

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is generally accepted that visual perception results from the activation of a feed-forward hierarchy of areas, leading to increasingly complex representations. Here we present evidence for a fundamental role of backward projections to the occipitotemporal region for understanding conceptual object properties. The evidence is based on two studies. In the first study, using highdensity EEG, we showed that during the observation of how objects are used there is an early activation of occipital and temporal areas, subsequently reaching the pole of the temporal lobe, and a late reactivation of the visual areas. In the second study, using transcranial magnetic stimulation over the occipital lobe, we showed a clear impairment in the accuracy of recognition of how objects are used during both early activation and, most importantly, late occipital reactivation. These findings represent strong neurophysiological evidence that a top-down mechanism is fundamental for understanding conceptual object properties, and suggest that a similar mechanism might be also present for other higher-order cognitive functions.object use understanding | top-down effect | conceptual knowledge C lassic studies on the neural basis of visual perception showed that neurons located in progressively higher cortical visual areas in the macaque monkey show increasingly complex properties (1-5). On the basis of these findings, it was proposed that neural substrate crucial for visual perception is represented by the higher-order visual areas of the inferior temporal lobe (6-8). Functional MRI (fMRI) data obtained in humans confirmed these findings (9, 10). These data also suggested that the temporal lobe poles are an even higher integration center, where conceptual object properties (e.g., how an object is commonly used) are represented (11-13).Visual information processing has been classically considered to be a feed-forward processing, with perception occurring when the areas at the top of the network become active (6, 14-16). On the other hand, rich anatomical evidence shows that there are massive feedback connections going from higher-order areas back to lower-order areas of the visual ventral stream (17-21). Physiological data also provide evidence for cross-talk between visual areas located at different hierarchical level. In fact transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) studies (22-26) reported that single-pulse TMS applied over primary visual areas produces significant perceptual impairment in two distinct time windows: an early one and a late one, relative to the presentation of a visual stimulus. The perception impairment caused by stimulation during the second (late) time window was interpreted as a consequence of an interference with a top-down reactivation of V1 (27,28). A TMS study by Pascual-Leone and Walsh (29) demonstrated that stimulation of area MT/V5 applied 30 ms before the stimulation of V1 affects the activity of this latter region, making participants perceive still rather than moving phosphenes. An analogous cross-talking ef...

show abstract

Figure–ground segregation requires two distinct periods of activity in V1: a transcranial magnetic stimulation study

Cited by 79 publications

References 24 publications

Atypical neural substrates of Embedded Figures Task performance in children with Autism Spectrum Disorder

Atypical neural substrates of Embedded Figures Task performance in children with Autism Spectrum Disorder

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

Spatiotemporal dynamics in understanding hand—object interactions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About