Kanizsa subjective figures capture visual spatial attention: evidence from electrophysiological and behavioral data

Senkowski, Daniel; Röttger, Stefan; Grimm, Sabine; Foxe, John J.; Herrmann, Christoph S.

doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2004.09.010

Cited by 58 publications

(63 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nonetheless, psychophysical data also support IC sensitivity occurring pre-attentively [73] and directing the allocation of spatial attention [74]. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 observation of neural sensitivity to ICs despite anesthesia (e.g.…”

Section: Event-related Potential (Erp)mentioning

confidence: 73%

“…In support of 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 pre-attentive mechanisms of IC sensitivity, patients with visuo-spatial neglect made no explicit report of the IC shapes despite benefiting from their presence to complete orthogonal visual tasks ( [66][67][68][69][70][71][72] see also [73,74]). Lesion analysis revealed the necessity of lateral occipital cortices (cf.…”

Section: Lesion and Neurostimulation Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Illusory contours: a window onto the neurophysiology of constructing perception

Murray

Herrmann

2013

Trends in Cognitive Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Seeing seems effortless, despite needing to segregate and integrate visual information that varies in its quality, quantity, and location. The extent to which seeing passively recapitulates the external world is challenged by phenomena such as illusory contours, an example of visual completion whereby borders are perceived despite their physical absence in the image. Instead, visual completion and seeing are increasingly conceived as active processes, dependent on information exchange across neural populations. How this is instantiated in the brain remains controversial. Divergent models emanate from single-unit and population-level electrophysiology, neuroimaging, and neurostimulation studies. We reconcile discrepant findings from different methods and disciplines, and underscore the importance of taking into account spatio-temporal brain dynamics in generating models of brain function and perception. Powered by Editorial Manager® and ProduXion Manager® from Aries Systems Corporation 1 Highlights Illusory contours exemplify core challenges for perception and binding  Competing models stem from diverse neurophysiologic metrics in animals and humans  Consideration of spatio-temporal brain dynamics reconciles these differences 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 2 AbstractSeeing seems effortless, despite needing to segregate and integrate visual information that varies in its quality, quantity, and location. The extent to which seeing passively recapitulates the external world is challenged by phenomena such as illusory contours, an example of visual completion whereby borders are perceived despite their physical absence in the image.Instead, visual completion and seeing are increasingly conceived as active processes, dependent on information exchange across neural populations. How this is instantiated in the brain remains controversial. Divergent models emanate from single-unit and population-level electrophysiology, neuroimaging, and neurostimulation studies. We reconcile discrepant findings from different methods and disciplines, and underscore the importance of taking into account spatio-temporal brain dynamics in generating models of brain function and perception. KeywordsVisual perception; perceptual completion; binding; object recognition; illusory contour; neuroimaging 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 In what follows, we provide a review of these developments as they pertain to Single-unit StudiesPsychology differentiates sensation from perception (Box 1). Sensation reflects the neural representation of physical properties of stimuli, whereas perception refers to consci...

show abstract

Section: Event-related Potential (Erp)mentioning

confidence: 73%

Section: Lesion and Neurostimulation Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Illusory contours: a window onto the neurophysiology of constructing perception

Murray

Herrmann

2013

Trends in Cognitive Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…ERP and source localization experiments have similarly pointed toward a role for the LOC in perceptual closure, figure-ground segregation, and the perception of illusory shapes (Pitts, Martínez, Brewer, & Hillyard, 2011;Grutzner et al, 2010;Jiang et al, 2008;Murray, Imber, Javitt, & Foxe, 2006;Sehatpour et al, 2006;Yoshino et al, 2006;Senkowski, Rottger, Grimm, Foxe, & Herrmann, 2005;Pegna, Khateb, Michel, & Landis, 2004;Murray et al, 2002;Pegna, Khateb, Murray, Landis, & Michel, 2002;Doniger et al, 2001;Kruggel, Herrmann, Wiggins, & von Cramon, 2001). Compared with contour integration, this stage of processing appears to be more strongly influenced by attention (Martinez, Ramanathan, Foxe, Javitt, & Hillyard, 2007;Martinez et al, 2006).…”

Section: Conscious Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual Processing of Contour Patterns under Conditions of Inattentional Blindness

Pitts

Martı́nez

Hillyard

2012

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

159

232

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An inattentional blindness paradigm was adapted to measure ERPs elicited by visual contour patterns that were or were not consciously perceived. In the first phase of the experiment, subjects performed an attentionally demanding task while task-irrelevant line segments formed square-shaped patterns or random configurations. After the square patterns had been presented 240 times, subjects' awareness of these patterns was assessed. More than half of all subjects, when queried, failed to notice the square patterns and were thus considered inattentionally blind during this first phase. In the second phase of the experiment, the task and stimuli were the same, but following this phase, all of the subjects reported having seen the patterns. ERPs recorded over the occipital pole differed in amplitude from 220 to 260 msec for the pattern stimuli compared with the random arrays regardless of whether subjects were aware of the patterns. At subsequent latencies (300-340 msec) however, ERPs over bilateral occipital-parietal areas differed between patterns and random arrays only when subjects were aware of the patterns. Finally, in a third phase of the experiment, subjects viewed the same stimuli, but the task was altered so that the patterns became task relevant. Here, the same two difference components were evident but were followed by a series of additional components that were absent in the first two phases of the experiment. We hypothesize that the ERP difference at 220-260 msec reflects neural activity associated with automatic contour integration whereas the difference at 300-340 msec reflects visual awareness, both of which are dissociable from task-related postperceptual processing.

show abstract

“…It is known that Kanizsa's subjective contour can be detected in parallel (Davis & Driver, 1994) and that such a popout item attracts attention (Joseph, Chun, & Nakayama, 1997;Wolfe, 1997). Moreover, the subjective contour captures visual attention (Ricciardelli, BonWglioli, Nicoletti, & Umiltà, 2001;Senkowski, Röttger, Grimm, Foxe, & Herrmann, 2005). Therefore, using a subjective contour enables us to directly investigate the role of visual attention in memory averaging and eliminates image integration at a coarse scale.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mislocalization of a target toward subjective contours: attentional modulation of location signals

Yamada

Kawabe

Miura

2007

Psychological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined whether a briefly presented target was mislocalized toward a subjective contour. Observers manually reproduced the position of a briefly presented peripheral target circle above a central fixation cross. A luminance contour, a subjective contour, or a no-contour stimulus was presented in either the left of right visual field, and a no-contour control was presented in the opposite visual field. After these stimuli vanished, a target circle was then presented. Consequently, the degree of mislocalization toward the subjective and luminance contours was the same; this indicated that image integration at a coarse spatial scale cannot explain mislocalization. Experiment 2 revealed that the mislocalization in Experiment 1 was not a result of eye movements. Experiment 3 found that the spatial attention allocated at the location of the luminance and subjective contours was more than that allocated at the no-contour stimulus. An attentional shift toward the task-irrelevant stimulus resulted in a mislocalization of the target.

show abstract

Kanizsa subjective figures capture visual spatial attention: evidence from electrophysiological and behavioral data

Cited by 58 publications

References 41 publications

Illusory contours: a window onto the neurophysiology of constructing perception

Illusory contours: a window onto the neurophysiology of constructing perception

Visual Processing of Contour Patterns under Conditions of Inattentional Blindness

Mislocalization of a target toward subjective contours: attentional modulation of location signals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About