Literature DB >> 16180628

Individual differences in FFA activity suggest independent processing at different spatial scales.

Isabel Gauthier1, Kim M Curby, Pawel Skudlarski, Russell A Epstein.   

Abstract

The brain processes images at different spatial scales, but it is unclear how far into the visual stream different scales remain segregated. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging, we found evidence that BOLD activity in the fusiform face area (FFA) reflects computations based on separate spatial frequency inputs. When subjects perform different tasks (attend location vs. identity; attend whole vs. parts) or the same task with different stimuli (upright or inverted) with high- and low-pass images of cars and faces, individual differences in the FFA in one condition are correlated with those in the other condition. However, FFA activity in response to low-pass stimuli is independent of its response to high-pass stimuli. These results suggest that spatial scales are not integrated before the FFA and that processing in this area could support the flexible use of different sources of information present in broad-pass images.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16180628     DOI: 10.3758/cabn.5.2.222

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci        ISSN: 1530-7026            Impact factor:   3.282


  51 in total

1.  Expertise for cars and birds recruits brain areas involved in face recognition.

Authors:  I Gauthier; P Skudlarski; J C Gore; A W Anderson
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 24.884

2.  Distinct spatial frequency sensitivities for processing faces and emotional expressions.

Authors:  Patrik Vuilleumier; Jorge L Armony; Jon Driver; Raymond J Dolan
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 24.884

3.  Show me the features! Understanding recognition from the use of visual information.

Authors:  Philippe G Schyns; Lizann Bonnar; Frédéric Gosselin
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2002-09

4.  Functional neuroanatomy of face and object processing. A positron emission tomography study.

Authors:  J Sergent; S Ohta; B MacDonald
Journal:  Brain       Date:  1992-02       Impact factor: 13.501

5.  Face-specific processing in the human fusiform gyrus.

Authors:  G McCarthy; A Puce; J C Gore; T Allison
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 3.225

6.  Electrophysiological studies of human face perception. II: Response properties of face-specific potentials generated in occipitotemporal cortex.

Authors:  G McCarthy; A Puce; A Belger; T Allison
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  1999 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.357

7.  Contrast masking in human vision.

Authors:  G E Legge; J M Foley
Journal:  J Opt Soc Am       Date:  1980-12

8.  Role of low and high spatial frequencies in the face-selective responses of neurons in the cortex in the superior temporal sulcus in the monkey.

Authors:  E T Rolls; G C Baylis; C M Leonard
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 1.886

9.  Face-sensitive regions in human extrastriate cortex studied by functional MRI.

Authors:  A Puce; T Allison; J C Gore; G McCarthy
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 2.714

10.  Faces and objects in macaque cerebral cortex.

Authors:  Doris Y Tsao; Winrich A Freiwald; Tamara A Knutsen; Joseph B Mandeville; Roger B H Tootell
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 24.884

View more
  25 in total

1.  Holistic processing of musical notation: Dissociating failures of selective attention in experts and novices.

Authors:  Yetta Kwailing Wong; Isabel Gauthier
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 3.282

2.  How to use individual differences to isolate functional organization, biology, and utility of visual functions; with illustrative proposals for stereopsis.

Authors:  Jeremy B Wilmer
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  2008

3.  The Vanderbilt Expertise Test reveals domain-general and domain-specific sex effects in object recognition.

Authors:  Rankin W McGugin; Jennifer J Richler; Grit Herzmann; Magen Speegle; Isabel Gauthier
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2012-08-02       Impact factor: 1.886

4.  Experience moderates overlap between object and face recognition, suggesting a common ability.

Authors:  Isabel Gauthier; Rankin W McGugin; Jennifer J Richler; Grit Herzmann; Magen Speegle; Ana E Van Gulick
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2014-07-03       Impact factor: 2.240

5.  Expertise Effects in Face-Selective Areas are Robust to Clutter and Diverted Attention, but not to Competition.

Authors:  Rankin Williams McGugin; Ana E Van Gulick; Benjamin J Tamber-Rosenau; David A Ross; Isabel Gauthier
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2014-03-28       Impact factor: 5.357

6.  Cortical Thickness in Fusiform Face Area Predicts Face and Object Recognition Performance.

Authors:  Rankin W McGugin; Ana E Van Gulick; Isabel Gauthier
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2015-10-06       Impact factor: 3.225

7.  Irrelevant objects of expertise compete with faces during visual search.

Authors:  Rankin W McGugin; Thomas J McKeeff; Frank Tong; Isabel Gauthier
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 2.199

8.  A visual short-term memory advantage for objects of expertise.

Authors:  Kim M Curby; Kuba Glazek; Isabel Gauthier
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 3.332

9.  The temporal advantage for individuating objects of expertise: perceptual expertise is an early riser.

Authors:  Kim M Curby; Isabel Gauthier
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2009-06-10       Impact factor: 2.240

10.  Natural facial motion enhances cortical responses to faces.

Authors:  Johannes Schultz; Karin S Pilz
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-02-11       Impact factor: 1.972

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.