Literature DB >> 15595890

Low spatial frequencies are suppressively masked across spatial scale, orientation, field position, and eye of origin.

Tim S Meese1, Robert F Hess.   

Abstract

Masking is said to occur when a mask stimulus interferes with the visibility of a target (test) stimulus. One widely held view of this process supposes interactions between mask and test mechanisms (cross-channel masking), and explicit models (e.g., J. M. Foley, 1994) have proposed that the interactions are inhibitory. Unlike a within-channel model, where masking involves the combination of mask and test stimulus within a single mechanism, this cross-channel inhibitory model predicts that the mask should attenuate the perceived contrast of a test stimulus. Another possibility is that masking is due to an increase in noise, in which case, perception of contrast should be unaffected once the signal exceeds detection threshold. We use circular patches and annuli of sine-wave grating in contrast detection and contrast matching experiments to test these hypotheses and investigate interactions across spatial frequency, orientation, field position, and eye of origin. In both types of experiments we found substantial effects of masking that can occur over a factor of 3 in spatial frequency, 45 degrees in orientation, across different field positions and between different eyes. We found the effects to be greatest at the lowest test spatial frequency we used (0.46 c/deg), and when the mask and test differed in all four dimensions simultaneously. This is surprising in light of previous work where it was concluded that suppression from the surround was strictly monocular (C. Chubb, G. Sperling, & J. A. Solomon, 1989). The results confirm that above detection threshold, cross-channel masking involves contrast suppression and not (purely) mask-induced noise. We conclude that cross-channel masking can be a powerful phenomenon, particularly at low test spatial frequencies and when mask and test are presented to different eyes.

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15595890     DOI: 10.1167/4.10.2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vis        ISSN: 1534-7362            Impact factor:   2.240


  24 in total

1.  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

2.  A cortical pooling model of spatial summation for perimetric stimuli.

Authors:  Fei Pan; William H Swanson
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2006-10-13       Impact factor: 2.240

3.  Perceived contrast in complex images.

Authors:  Andrew M Haun; Eli Peli
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2013-11-04       Impact factor: 2.240

Review 4.  Lateral effects in pattern vision.

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

5.  Quantitative multifocal fMRI shows active suppression in human V1.

Authors:  Miika Pihlaja; Linda Henriksson; Andrew C James; Simo Vanni
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 5.038

6.  Binocular combination of phase and contrast explained by a gain-control and gain-enhancement model.

Authors:  Jian Ding; Stanley A Klein; Dennis M Levi
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2013-02-08       Impact factor: 2.240

7.  Functional burden of strabismus: decreased binocular summation and binocular inhibition.

Authors:  Stacy L Pineles; Federico G Velez; Sherwin J Isenberg; Zachary Fenoglio; Eileen Birch; Steven Nusinowitz; Joseph L Demer
Journal:  JAMA Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 7.389

8.  Orientation bandwidths are invariant across spatiotemporal frequency after isotropic components are removed.

Authors:  John Cass; Sjoerd Stuit; Peter Bex; David Alais
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2009-11-23       Impact factor: 2.240

9.  Multiple components of surround modulation in primary visual cortex: multiple neural circuits with multiple functions?

Authors:  Lauri Nurminen; Alessandra Angelucci
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2014-09-06       Impact factor: 1.886

10.  Normative reference ranges for binocular summation as a function of age for low contrast letter charts.

Authors:  Stacy L Pineles; Federico G Velez; Fei Yu; Joseph L Demer; Eileen Birch
Journal:  Strabismus       Date:  2014-10-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.