Literature DB >> 11712981

Flanker effects in peripheral contrast discrimination--psychophysics and modeling.

B Zenger-Landolt1, C Koch.   

Abstract

We studied lateral interactions in the periphery by measuring how contrast discrimination of a peripheral Gabor patch is affected by flankers. In the psychophysical experiments, two Gabor targets appeared simultaneously to the left and right of fixation (4 degrees eccentricity). Observers reported which contrast was higher (spatial 2-alternative-forced-choice). In different conditions, Gabor flankers of different orientation, phase, and contrast were present above and below the two targets, at a distance of three times the spatial Gabor period. The data show that collinear flanks impair discrimination performance for low pedestal contrasts but have no effect for high pedestal contrasts. The transition between these two result patterns occurs typically at a pedestal contrast which is similar to the flanker contrast. For orthogonal flanks, we find facilitation at low pedestal contrasts, and suppression at intermediate contrasts. We account for this complex interaction pattern by a model that assumes that flankers can provide additive input to the target unit, and that they further contribute to the target's gain control, but only in a limited range of pedestal contrasts; once the target contrast exceeds a critical value, inhibition becomes subtractive rather than divisive. We further make specific propositions on how this model could be implemented at the neuronal level and show that a simple integrate and fire unit that receives time-modulated inhibition behaves in a fashion strikingly similar to the model inferred from the psychophysical data.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11712981     DOI: 10.1016/s0042-6989(01)00175-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vision Res        ISSN: 0042-6989            Impact factor:   1.886


  20 in total

1.  Response suppression in v1 agrees with psychophysics of surround masking.

Authors:  Barbara Zenger-Landolt; David J Heeger
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2003-07-30       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Contextual effects in fine spatial discriminations.

Authors:  Lynn A Olzak; Pentti I Laurinen
Journal:  J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 2.129

3.  The effect of spatial configuration on surround suppression of contrast sensitivity.

Authors:  Yury Petrov; Suzanne P McKee
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2006-03-09       Impact factor: 2.240

4.  Perceptual learning in contrast detection: presence and cost of shifts in response criteria.

Authors:  Michael J Wenger; Christoph Rasche
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2006-08

5.  Explaining the footsteps, belly dancer, Wenceslas, and kickback illusions.

Authors:  Piers D L Howe; Peter G Thompson; Stuart M Anstis; Hersh Sagreiya; Margaret S Livingstone
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2006-12-12       Impact factor: 2.240

6.  Adapting to altered image statistics using processed video.

Authors:  Michael Falconbridge; David Wozny; Ladan Shams; Stephen A Engel
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2009-04-11       Impact factor: 1.886

Review 7.  Lateral effects in pattern vision.

Authors:  John M Foley
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2019-08-01       Impact factor: 2.240

8.  Responses to second-order texture modulations undergo surround suppression.

Authors:  Helena X Wang; David J Heeger; Michael S Landy
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2012-06-01       Impact factor: 1.886

9.  High-resolution BOLD fMRI measurements of local orientation-dependent contextual modulation show a mismatch between predicted V1 output and local BOLD response.

Authors:  Jennifer F Schumacher; Cheryl A Olman
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2010-04-09       Impact factor: 1.886

10.  Two distinct mechanisms of suppression in human vision.

Authors:  Yury Petrov; Matteo Carandini; Suzanne McKee
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2005-09-21       Impact factor: 6.167

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.