Nofri Parsons posted an update 1 week ago
Nature 400(6739):65?9.17. Arnold DH, Erskine HE, Roseboom W, Wallis TS (2010) Spatiotemporal rivalry: A perceptual conflict involving illusory moving and static types. Psychol Sci 21(five):692?99. 18. Cass J, Alais D (2006) Proof for two interacting temporal channels in human visual processing. journal.pone.0158910 Vision Res 46(18):2859?868. 19. Grindley GC, Townsend V (1965) Binocular masking induced by a moving object. Q J Exp Psychol 17:97?09. 20. Schyns PG, Oliva A (1999) Dr. Angry and Mr. Smile: When categorization flexibly modifies the perception of faces in rapid visual presentations. Cognition 69(3):243?65. 21. Brainard DH (1997) The psychophysics toolbox. Spat Vis ten(four):433?36. 22. Pelli DG (1997) The VideoToolbox application for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spat Vis 10(four):437?42. 23. Daniel PM, Whitteridge D (1961) The representation with the visual field on the cerebral cortex in monkeys. J Physiol 159:203?21. 24. Johnston A, Wright MJ (1983) Visual motion and cortical velocity. Nature 304(5925): 436?38. 25. Rovamo J, Virsu V (1979) An estimation and scan/nsx016 application on the human cortical magnification issue. Exp Brain Res 37(3):495?ten. 26. Parker A (1981) Shifts in perceived periodicity induced by temporal modulation and their influence on the spatial frequency tuning of two aftereffects. Vision Res 21(12): 1739?747. 27. Blakemore C, Sutton P (1969) Size adaptation: A new aftereffect. Science 166(3902): 245?47. 28. Elliott SL, Georgeson MA, Webster MA (2011) Response normalization and blur adaptation: Data and multi-scale model. J Vis 11(2):7. 29. Webster MA, Georgeson MA, Webster SM (2002) Neural adjustments to image blur. Nat Neurosci 5(9):839?40. 30. Maloney LT (1986) Evaluation of linear models of surface spectral reflectance with small numbers of parameters. J Opt Soc Am A 3(10):1673?683. 31. Field DJ (1987) Relations amongst the statistics of natural images as well as the response properties of cortical cells. J Opt Soc Am A 4(12):2379?394.Arnold et al.PNAS | November 1, 2016 | vol. 113 | no. 44 |PSYCHOLOGICAL AND COGNITIVE SCIENCESGeneral Discussion Our data show that human form perception can transiently be sharpened by FFAd. We’ve got discovered that FFAd can temporarily (i) bias facial coding in favor of higher spatial frequency content material (experiment 1), (ii) heighten spatial acuities (experiments 2 and 3), and (iii) selectively depress spatial contrast sensitivity at low spatial frequencies (experiment four). To be clear, we are not proposing that FFAd operates by straight enhancing the responses of “parvo”-fed mechanisms sensitive to high spatial frequencies. Rather, we believe human vision synthesizes form signals across a range of spatial frequency-tuned mechanisms, and that FFAd operates by selectively minimizing the contribution of “magno”-fed channels that encode coarse spatial resolutions. Attenuating this contribution results in perceptual Grazoprevir chemical information sharpening, as these channels add blur (low spatial frequency content material) to perception. Our results would hence be akin to the well-known demonstration that the ability to recognize a pixelated face is often improved by removing uninformative high spatial frequency content–by blurring the image by squinting. In both circumstances, perception is enhanced by attenuating information damaging for the task at hand–in this case, blurry low spatial frequency content material when attempting to make fine spatial judgments and within the other case, uninformative higher spatial frequency c.