Literature DB >> 16643092

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

Yury Petrov1, Suzanne P McKee.   

Abstract

Contrast sensitivity is known to be strongly influenced by the target surround, yet the role of the surround interaction in visual processing remains unclear. Previously, we have shown that the surround strongly suppresses contrast sensitivity in the periphery when the surround spatial frequency and orientation match those of the target (Petrov, Carandini, & McKee, 2005). Here, we explore how various spatial characteristics of the iso-oriented and frequency-matched surround, such as surround phase and spatial layout, affect suppression. We manipulated surround geometry (annulus ring, half annulus, and bow tie) and its separation from the target (both laterally and in depth) and varied the position of the half-annulus and bow-tie surrounds with respect to Gabor target's orientation and with respect to its location in the visual field (i.e., radial vs. tangential surrounds). We also compared monoptic, dichoptic, and binocular surround suppression. Except for a significant radial-tangential anisotropy, only the area of the surround and the lateral separation between the surround and target had a significant effect on the magnitude of suppression. We showed that, although suppression amplitude remains constant with stimulus eccentricity, the lateral extent of suppression scales in proportion to the eccentricity. The most surprising finding was that the extent of surround suppression does not scale with stimulus size or spatial frequency. We suggest that the properties of surround suppression are best explained by a mechanism that selects salient targets for subsequent saccades.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16643092      PMCID: PMC1472811          DOI: 10.1167/6.3.4

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


  46 in total

1.  Asymmetric suppression outside the classical receptive field of the visual cortex.

Authors:  G A Walker; I Ohzawa; R D Freeman
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  1999-12-01       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Facilitation from collinear flanks is cancelled by non-collinear flanks.

Authors:  J A Solomon; M J Morgan
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 1.886

3.  Measurement and modeling of center-surround suppression and enhancement.

Authors:  J Xing; D J Heeger
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 1.886

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

Authors:  B Zenger-Landolt; C Koch
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  Natural signal statistics and sensory gain control.

Authors:  O Schwartz; E P Simoncelli
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 24.884

6.  Spatial-frequency and contrast properties of crowding.

Authors:  S T Chung; D M Levi; G E Legge
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 1.886

7.  Center-surround interactions in foveal and peripheral vision.

Authors:  J Xing; D J Heeger
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 1.886

8.  Disinhibition outside receptive fields in the visual cortex.

Authors:  Gary A Walker; Izumi Ohzawa; Ralph D Freeman
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2002-07-01       Impact factor: 6.167

9.  Collinear facilitation is largely uncertainty reduction.

Authors:  Yury Petrov; Preeti Verghese; Suzanne P McKee
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2006-02-23       Impact factor: 2.240

Review 10.  Computational modelling of visual attention.

Authors:  L Itti; C Koch
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 34.870

View more
  44 in total

1.  Linking neuronal and behavioral performance in a reaction-time visual detection task.

Authors:  Chris Palmer; Shao-Ying Cheng; Eyal Seidemann
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2007-07-25       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Crowding and surround suppression: not to be confused.

Authors:  Yury Petrov; Ariella V Popple; Suzanne P McKee
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2007-04-25       Impact factor: 2.240

3.  The nature of letter crowding as revealed by first- and second-order classification images.

Authors:  Anirvan S Nandy; Bosco S Tjan
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2007-02-07       Impact factor: 2.240

4.  Using a filtering task to measure the spatial extent of selective attention.

Authors:  John Palmer; Cathleen M Moore
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2008-04-10       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  Visual crowding in V1.

Authors:  Rachel Millin; A Cyrus Arman; Susana T L Chung; Bosco S Tjan
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2013-07-05       Impact factor: 5.357

6.  Segmentation decreases the magnitude of the tilt illusion.

Authors:  Cheng Qiu; Daniel Kersten; Cheryl A Olman
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2013-11-20       Impact factor: 2.240

7.  Characterizing the effects of feature salience and top-down attention in the early visual system.

Authors:  Sonia Poltoratski; Sam Ling; Devin McCormack; Frank Tong
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-04-05       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  Image correlates of crowding in natural scenes.

Authors:  Thomas S A Wallis; Peter J Bex
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2012-07-13       Impact factor: 2.240

9.  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

10.  The role of feedback in visual masking and visual processing.

Authors:  Stephen L Macknik; Susana Martinez-Conde
Journal:  Adv Cogn Psychol       Date:  2008-07-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.