Object representations in ventral and dorsal visual streams: FMRI repetition effects depend on attention and part-whole configuration

NeuroImage

Volumn 57, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 513-525

  Thoma, Volker ^a   Henson, Richard N ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EAST LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b MRC Cognition and Brain Science Unit   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Attention; FMRI; Object recognition; Repetition enhancement; Repetition suppression; View dependence

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; ATTENTION; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; FUSIFORM GYRUS; HEMISPHERIC DOMINANCE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INTRAPARIETAL SULCUS; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STIMULUS RESPONSE; VISUAL MEMORY;

ADULT; ATTENTION; BRAIN; BRAIN MAPPING; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; REACTION TIME; VISUAL PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79958734046     PISSN: 10538119     EISSN: 10959572     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.04.035     Document Type: Article

References (90)

1. Andresen D.R., Vinberg J., Grill-Spector K. The representation of object viewpoint in human visual cortex. Neuroimage 2009, 45:522-536.
2. Bartram D.J. Levels of coding in picture-picture comparison tasks. Mem. Cognit. 1976, 593-602.
3. Basri R., Ullman S. The alignment of objects with smooth surfaces. CVGIP Image Underst. 1993, 57:331-345.
4. Biederman I. Recognition-by-components: a theory of human image understanding. Psychol. Rev. 1987, 94:115-147.
5. Biederman I. Recognizing depth-rotated objects: a review of recent research and theory. Spat. Vis. 2000, 13:241-253.
6. Biederman I., Bar M. One-shot viewpoint invariance in matching novel objects. Vision Res. 1999, 39:2885-2899.
7. Biederman I., Cooper E.E. Priming contour-deleted images: evidence for intermediate representations in visual object recognition. Cogn. Psychol. 1991, 23:393-419.
8. Biederman I., Gerhardstein P.C. Recognizing depth-rotated objects: evidence and conditions for three-dimensional viewpoint invariance. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 1993, 19:1162-1182.
9. Bruce V., Carson D., Burton A.M., Ellis A.W. Perceptual priming is not a necessary consequence of semantic classification of pictures. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. A 2000, 53:289-323.
10. Bulthoff H.H., Edelman S. Psychophysical support for a two-dimensional view interpolation theory of objectrecognition. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1992, 89:60-64.
11. Burgund E.D., Marsolek C.J. Viewpoint-invariant and viewpoint-dependent object recognition in dissociable neural subsystems. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 2000, 7:480-489.
12. Cave C.B., Kosslyn S.M. The role of parts and spatial relations in object identification. Perception 1993, 22:229-248.
13. Chouinard P., Morrissey B., Kohler S., Goodale M. Repetition suppression in occipital-temporal visual areas is modulated by physical rather than semantic features of objects. Neuroimage 2008, 41:130-144.
14. Cycowicz Y.M., Friedman D., Rothstein M., Snodgrass J.G. Picture naming by young children: norms for name agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 1997, 65:171-237.
15. Davidoff J., Warrington E.K. The bare bones of object recognition: implications from a case of object recognition impairment. Neuropsychologia 1999, 37:279-292.
16. Dien J. A tale of two recognition systems: implications of the fusiform face area and the visual word form area for lateralized object recognition models. Neuropsychologia 2009, 47:1-16.
17. Dobbins I.G., Schnyer D.M., Verfaellie M., Schacter D.L. Cortical activity reductions during repetition priming can result from rapid response learning. Nature 2004, 428:316-319.
18. Dolan R.J., Fink G.R., Rolls E., Booth M., Holmes A., Frackowiak R.S., Friston K.J. How the brain learns to see objects and faces in an impoverished context. Nature 1997, 389:596-599.
19. Edelman S., Intrator N. (Coarse coding of shape fragments)+(retinotopy)≈representation of structure. Spat. Vis. 2000, 13:255-264.
20. Edelman S., Intrator N. Towards structural systematicity in distributed, statically bound visual representations. Cogn. Sci. 2003, 27:73-109.
21. Eger E., Henson R.N., Driver J., Dolan R.J. BOLD repetition decreases in object-responsive ventral visual areas depend on spatial attention. J. Neurophysiol. 2004, 92:1241-1247.
22. Eger E., Henson R., Driver J., Dolan R. Mechanisms of top-down facilitation in perception of visual objects studied by fMRI. Cereb. Cortex 2007, 17:2123-2133.
23. Epstein R.A., Parker W.E., Feiler A.M. Two kinds of fMRI repetition suppression? Evidence for dissociable neural mechanisms. J. Neurophysiol. 2008, 99:2877-2886.
24. Eriksen C.W., St James J.D. Visual attention within and around the field of focal attention: a zoom lens model. Percept. Psychophys. 1986, 40:225-240.
25. Ewbank M.P., Schluppeck D., Andrews T.J. fMR-adaptation reveals a distributed representation of inanimate objects and places in human visual cortex. Neuroimage 2005, 28:268-279.
26. Fang F., He S. Cortical responses to invisible objects in the human dorsal and ventral pathways. Nat. Neurosci. 2005, 8:1380-1385.
27. Fang F., Murray S.O., He S. Duration-dependent fMRI adaptation and distributed viewer-centered face representation in human visual cortex. Cereb. Cortex 2006, 17:1402-1411.
28. Friston K.J., Glaser D.E., Henson R.N.A., Kiebel S., Phillips C., Ashburner J. Classical and Bayesian inference in neuroimaging: applications. Neuroimage 2002, 16:484-512.
29. Friston K., Rotshtein P., Geng J., Sterzer P., Henson R. A critique of functional localisers. Neuroimage 2006, 30:1077-1087.
30. Ganel T., Gonzalez C.L., Valyear K.F., Culham J.C., Goodale M.A., Köhler S. The relationship between fMRI adaptation and repetition priming. Neuroimage 2006, 32:1432-1440.
31. Gauthier I., Hayward W.G., Tarr M.J., Anderson A.W., Skudlarski P., Gore J.C. BOLD activity during mental rotation and viewpoint-dependent object recognition. Neuron 2002, 34:161-171.
32. Goodale M.A., Milner A.D. Plans for action. Behav. Brain Sci. 2004, 27.
33. Grabowska A., Nowicka A. Visual spatial frequency model of cerebral asymmetry: a critical surwey of behavioural and elecrophysiological studies. Psychol. Bull. 1996, 120:434-449.
34. Grill-Spector K., Kushnir T., Edelman S., Avidan G., Itzchak Y., Malach R. Differential processing of objects under various viewing conditions in the human lateral occipital complex. Neuron 1999, 24:187-203.
35. Grill-Spector K., Henson R., Martin A. Repetition and the brain: neural models of stimulus-specific effects. Trends Cogn. Sci. (Regul. Ed.) 2006, 10:14-23.
36. Hayward W.G., Zhou G., Man W., Harris I.M. Repetition blindness for rotated objects. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 2010, 36:57-73.
37. Hayworth K.J., Biederman I. Neural evidence for intermediate representations in object recognition. Vision Res. 2006, 46:4024-4031.
38. Henson R. Neuroimaging studies of priming. Prog. Neurobiol. 2003, 70:53-81.
39. Henson R., Mouchlianitis E. Effect of spatial attention on stimulus-specific haemodynamic repetition effects. Neuroimage 2007, 35:1317-1329.
40. Henson R., Rylands A., Ross E., Vuilleumeir P., Rugg M. The effect of repetition lag on electrophysiological and haemodynamic correlates of visual object priming. Neuroimage 2004, 21:1674-1689.
41. Horner, A.J., Henson, R.N., in press. Repetition suppression in occipitotemporal cortex despite negligible visual similarity: evidence for post-perceptual processing? Hum Brain Mapp.
42. Horner A., Henson R. Priming, response learning and repetition suppression. Neuropsychologia 2008, 46:1979-1991.
43. Hummel J.E. Complementary solutions to the binding problem in vision: implications for shape perception and object recognition. Vis. Cogn. 2001, 8:489-517.
44. Hummel J.E., 2003. "Effective systematicity" in, "effective systematicity" out: a reply to Edelman and Intrator (2003). Cog. Sci. 27:327-329.
45. Hummel J.E., Biederman I. Dynamic binding in a neural network for shape recognition. Psychol. Rev. 1992, 99:480-517.
46. Hummel J.E., Stankiewicz B.J. An architecture for rapid, hierarchical structural description. Attention and Performance XVI: Information Integration in Perception and Communication 1996, MIT Press. T. Inui, J. McClelland (Eds.).
47. Humphreys G.W., Riddoch M.J., Quinlan P.T., Price C.J., Donnelly N. Parallel pattern processing and visual agnosia. Can. J. Psychol. Rev. Can. Psychol. 1992, 46:377-416.
48. James T.W., Humphrey G., Gati J.S., Menon R.S., Goodale M.A. Differential effects of viewpoint on object-driven activation in dorsal and ventral streams. Neuron 2002, 35:793-801.
49. Kourtzi Z., Kanwisher N. Cortical regions involved in perceiving object shape. J. Neurosci. 2000, 20:3310-3318.
50. Koutstaal W., Wagner A.D., Rotte M., Maril A., Buckner R.L., Schacter D.L. Perceptual specificity in visual object priming: functional magnetic resonance imaging evidence for a laterality difference in fusiform cortex. Neuropsychologia 2001, 39:184-199.
51. Lachter J., Forster K.I., Ruthruff E. Forty-five years after Broadbent (1958): still no identification without attention. Psychol. Rev. 2004, 111:880-913.
52. Lawson R. Achieving visual object constancy across plane rotation and depth rotation. Acta Psychol. 1999, 102:221-245.
53. Layman S., Greene E. The effect of stroke on object recognition. Brain Cogn. 1988, 7:87-114.
54. Lazareva O.F., Wasserman E.A., Biederman I. Pigeons and humans are more sensitive to nonaccidental than to metric changes in visual objects. Behav. Processes 2008, 77:199-209.
55. Logothetis N.K., Pauls J., Bulthoff H.H., Poggio T. View-dependent object recognition by monkeys. Curr. Biol. 1994, 4(5):401-414.
56. Lowe D. Perceptual organization and visual recognition. Distributors for North America Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston 1985, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Hingham MA U.S.A.
57. Marr D., Nishihara H.K. Representation and recognition of the spatial organization of three-dimensional shapes. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 1978, 200:269-294.
58. Marsolek C.J. Dissociable neural subsystems underlie abstract and specific object recognition. Psychol. Sci. 1999, 10:111-118.
59. Milner A., Goodale M.A. The Visual Brain in Action 1995, Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York.
60. Murray S.O., Wojciulik E. Attention increases neural selectivity in the human lateral occipital complex. Nat. Neurosci. 2003, 7:70-74.
61. Newell F.N., Sheppard D.M., Edelman S., Shapiro K.L. The interaction of shape- and location-based priming in object categorisation: evidence for a hybrid "what+where" representation stage. Vision Res. 2005, 45:2065-2080.
62. Nichols T., Hayasaka S. Controlling the familywise error rate in functional neuroimaging: a comparative review. Stat. Methods Med. Res. 2003, 5:419-446.
63. Peissig J.J., Tarr M.J. Visual object recognition: do we know more now than we did 20years ago?. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2007, 58:75-96.
64. Perrett D., Oram M.W., Ashbridge E. Evidence accumulation in cell populations responsive to faces: an account of generalisation of recognition without mental transformations. Cognition 1998, 67:111-145.
65. Poggio T., Edelman S. A network that learns to recognize three-dimensional objects. Nature 1990, 343:263-266.
66. Saiki J., Hummel J.E. Attribute conjunctions and the part configuration advantage in object category learning. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 1996, 22:1002-1019.
67. Saxe R., Brett M., Kanwisher N. Divide and conquer: a defense offunctional localizers. Neuroimage 2006, 30:1088-1096.
68. Sayres R., Grill-Spector K. Object-selective cortex exhibits performance-independent repetition suppression. J. Neurophysiol. 2006, 95:995-1007.
69. Simons J.S., Koutstaal W., Prince S., Wagner A.D., Schacter D.L. Neural mechanisms of visual object priming: evidence for perceptual and semantic distinctions in fusiform cortex. Neuroimage 2003, 19:613-626.
70. Snodgrass J.G., Vanderwart M. A standardized set of 260 pictures: norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Learn. 1980, 6:174-215.
71. Stankiewicz B.J., Hummel J.E. Automatic priming for translation- and scale-invariant representations of object shape. Vis. Cogn. 2002, 9:719-739.
72. Stankiewicz B.J., Hummel J.E., Cooper E.E. The role of attention in priming for left-right reflections of object images: evidence for a dual representation of object shape. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 1998, 24:732-744.
73. Sutherland N.S. Outlines of a theory of visual pattern recognition in animals and man. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 1968, 171:297-317.
74. Tarr M.J. Rotating objects to recognize them: a case study on the role of viewpoint dependency in the recognition of three-dimensional objects. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 1995, 2:55-82.
75. Tarr M.J., Gauthier I. Do viewpoint-dependent mechanisms generalize across members of a class?. Cognition 1998, 67:73-110.
76. Thoma V., Davidoff J. Priming of depth-rotated objects depends on attention and part changes. Exp. Psychol. 2006, 53:31-47.
77. Thoma V., Davidoff J.B. Object recognition: attention and dual routes. Object Recognition, Attention & Action. Tokyo 2007, 141-157. I. Osaka, I. Rentschler, I. Biederman (Eds.).
78. Thoma V., Hummel J.E., Davidoff J. Evidence for holistic representations of ignored images and analytic representations of attended images. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 2004, 30:257-267.
79. Thoma V., Davidoff J., Hummel J. Priming of plane-rotated objects depends on attention and view familiarity. PVIS 2007, 15:179-210.
80. Todd J.J., Marois R. Capacity limit of visual short-term memory in human posterior parietal cortex. Nature 2004, 428:751-754.
81. Ullman S. Aligning pictorial descriptions: an approach to object recognition. Cognition 1989, 32:193-254.
82. Ullman S. Three-dimensional object recognition based on the combination of views. Cognition 1998, 67:21-44.
83. Ullman S. Object recognition and segmentation by a fragment-based hierarchy. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2007, 11:58-64.
84. Vuilleumier P., Henson R.N., Driver J., Dolan R.J. Multiple levels of visual object constancy revealed by event-related fMRI of repetition priming. Nat. Neurosci. 2002, 5:491-499.
85. Vuilleumier P., Schwartz S., Duhoux S., Dolan R.J., Driver J. Selective attention modulates neural substrates of repetition priming and "implicit" visual memory: suppressions and enhancements revealed by fMRI. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 2005, 17:1245-1260.
86. Warrington E.K., James M. Visual apperceptive agnosia: a clinico-anatomical study of three cases. Cortex 1988, 24:13-32.
87. Warrington E.K., Taylor A.M. Two categorical stages of object recognition. Perception 1978, 7:695-705.
88. Xu, Y., Chun, M.M., 2006. Dissociable neural mechanisms supporting visual short-term memory for objects. Nature 440, 91-95.
89. Xu Y., Turk-Browne N.B., Chun M.M. Dissociating task performance from fMRI repetition attenuation in ventral visual cortex. J. Neurosci. 2007, 27:5981-5985.
90. Zago L., Fenske M.J., Aminoff E., Bar M. The rise and fall of visual priming: how visual exposure shapes cortical representations of objetcs. Cereb. Cortex 2005, 15:1655-1665.