Article

The spatiotemporal dynamics of illusory contour processing: combined high-density electrical mapping, source analysis, and functional magnetic resonance imaging.

The Cognitive Neurophysiology Laboratory, Program in Cognitive Neuroscience and Schizophrenia, Nathan S. Kline Institute for Psychiatric Research, Orangeburg, New York 10962, USA.
The Journal of Neuroscience : The Official Journal of the Society for Neuroscience (Impact Factor: 6.75). 07/2002; 22(12):5055-73.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Because environmental information is often suboptimal, visual perception must frequently rely on the brain's reconstruction of contours absent from retinal images. Illusory contour (IC) stimuli have been used to investigate these "filling-in" processes. Intracranial recordings and neuroimaging studies show IC sensitivity in lower-tier area V2, and to a lesser extent V1. Some interpret these data as evidence for feedforward processing of IC stimuli, beginning at lower-tier visual areas. On the basis of lesion, visual evoked potentials (VEP), and neuroimaging evidence, others contend that IC sensitivity is a later, higher-order process. Whether IC sensitivity seen in lower-tier areas indexes feedforward or feedback processing remains unresolved. In a series of experiments, we addressed the spatiotemporal dynamics of IC processing. Centrally presented IC stimuli resulted in early VEP modulation (88-100 msec) over lateral-occipital (LOC) scalp--the IC effect. The IC effect followed visual response onset by 40 msec. Scalp current density topographic mapping, source analysis, and functional magnetic resonance imaging results all localized the IC effect to bilateral LOC areas. We propose that IC sensitivity described in V2 and V1 may reflect predominantly feedback modulation from higher-tier LOC areas, where IC sensitivity first occurs. Two additional observations further support this proposal. The latency of the IC effect shifted dramatically later (approximately 120 msec) when stimuli were laterally presented, indicating that retinotopic position alters IC processing. Immediately preceding the IC effect, the VEP modulated with inducer eccentricity--the configuration effect. We interpret this to represent contributions from global stimulus parameters to scene analysis. In contrast to the IC effect, the topography of the configuration effect was restricted to central parieto-occipital scalp.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: John J Foxe, Jun 29, 2015
1 Follower
 · 
115 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Spatial neglect is traditionally explained as an imbalance of the interhemispheric reciprocal inhibition exerted by the two hemispheres: after a right lesion, the contralesional hemisphere becomes disinhibited and its enhanced activity suppresses the activity in the lesioned one. Even though the hyperexcitability of the left hemisphere is the theoretical framework of several rehabilitation interventions using non-invasive brain stimulation protocols in neglect, no study has yet investigated directly the actual state of cortical excitability of the contralesional hemisphere immediately after the brain lesion. The present study represents the first attempt to directly assess the interhemispheric rivalry model adopting a novel approach based on the induction of neglect-like biases in healthy participants. Applying repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) over the right posterior parietal cortex while concurrently recording the EEG activity allows to measure specific neurophysiological markers of cortical activity (i.e. TMS-evoked potentials, TEPs) both over the stimulated right hemisphere and over the contralateral homologous area. Besides the effectiveness of the protocol used in modulating behavior, our results show an inhibition of the cortical excitability of the directly stimulated parietal cortex (right hemisphere) and, most importantly, a comparable reduction of cortical excitability of the homologous contralateral (left) area. TEPs and additional electrophysiological measures reliably provide strong evidence for a bilateral hypo-activation following TMS induction of neglect-like biases. These results suggest that the parietal imbalance typically found in neglect patients could reflect a long-term maladaptive plastic reorganization that follows a brain lesion. Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
    Neuropsychologia 04/2015; 72. DOI:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2015.04.010 · 3.45 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of the occipital cortex is known to induce visual sensations, i.e. phosphenes, which appear as flashes of light in the absence of an external stimulus. Recent studies have shown that TMS can produce phosphenes also when the intraparietal sulcus (IPS) is stimulated. The main question addressed in this paper is whether parietal phosphenes are generated directly by local mechanisms or emerge through indirect activation of other visual areas. Electroencephalographic (EEG) signals were recorded while stimulating left occipital or parietal cortices inducing phosphene perception in healthy participants and in a hemianopic patient who suffered from complete destruction of the early visual cortex of the left hemisphere. Results in healthy participants showed that the onset of phosphene perception induced by occipital TMS correlated with differential cortical activity in temporal sites while the onset of phosphene perception induced by parietal TMS correlated with differential cortical activity in the stimulated parietal site. Moreover, IPS-TMS of the lesioned hemisphere of the hemianopic patient with a complete lesion to V1 showed again that the onset of phosphene perception correlated with differential cortical activity in the stimulated parietal site. The present data seem thus to suggest that temporal and parietal cortices can serve as different local early gatekeepers of perceptual awareness and that activity in the occipital cortex, although being relevant for perception in general, is not part of the neural bases of the perceptual awareness of phosphenes. Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
    Neuropsychologia 02/2015; 70. DOI:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2015.02.021 · 3.45 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We assessed the role of alpha-band oscillatory activity during a task-switching design that required participants to switch between an auditory and a visual task, while task-relevant audiovisual inputs were simultaneously presented. Instructional cues informed participants which task to perform on a given trial and we assessed alpha-band power in the short 1.35-s period intervening between the cue and the task-imperative stimuli, on the premise that attentional biasing mechanisms would be deployed to resolve competition between the auditory and visual inputs. Prior work had shown that alpha-band activity was differentially deployed depending on the modality of the cued task. Here, we asked whether this activity would, in turn, be differentially deployed depending on whether participants had just made a switch of task or were being asked to simply repeat the task. It is well established that performance speed and accuracy are poorer on switch than on repeat trials. Here, however, the use of instructional cues completely mitigated these classic switch-costs. Measures of alpha-band synchronisation and desynchronisation showed that there was indeed greater and earlier differential deployment of alpha-band activity on switch vs. repeat trials. Contrary to our hypothesis, this differential effect was entirely due to changes in the amount of desynchronisation observed during switch and repeat trials of the visual task, with more desynchronisation over both posterior and frontal scalp regions during switch-visual trials. These data imply that particularly vigorous, and essentially fully effective, anticipatory biasing mechanisms resolved the competition between competing auditory and visual inputs when a rapid switch of task was required.
    European Journal of Neuroscience 04/2014; 39(11). DOI:10.1111/ejn.12577 · 3.67 Impact Factor