Synchronous contextual irregularities affect early scene processing: Replication and extension

Neuropsychologia

Volumn 56, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 447-458

  Mudrik, Liad ^a,b   Shalgi, Shani ^c   Lamy, Dominique ^a   Deouell, Leon Y ^c  

^a TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

^b CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^c HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM   (Israel)

Author keywords

Context effects; Event related potentials; Incongruency; Matching models; N300 N400; Visual scenes

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; EVENT RELATED POTENTIAL; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LATENT PERIOD; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PERCEPTION; PHYSICAL PARAMETERS; REACTION TIME; SCENE PROCESSING; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; SYNCHRONOUS CONTEXTUAL IRREGULARITY; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISUAL DISCRIMINATION;

CONTEXT EFFECTS; EVENT-RELATED POTENTIALS; INCONGRUENCY; MATCHING MODELS; N300/N400; VISUAL SCENES;

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ATTENTION; BRAIN; BRAIN MAPPING; CUES; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; EVOKED POTENTIALS; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PHOTIC STIMULATION; REACTION TIME; TIME FACTORS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84896043286     PISSN: 00283932     EISSN: 18733514     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.02.020     Document Type: Article

References (116)

1. Antes J.R., Penland J.G., Metzger R.L. Processing global information in briefly presented pictures. Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung 1981, 43(3):277-292.
2. Ariely D. Seeing sets: Representation by statistical properties. Psychological Science 2001, 12(2):157-162.
3. Bar M. A cortical mechanism for triggering top-down facilitation in visual object recognition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2003, 15(4):600-609.
4. Bar M. Visual objects in context. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2004, 5(8):617-629.
5. Bar M., Aminoff E. Cortical analysis of visual context. Neuron 2003, 38(2):347-358.
6. Bar M., Kassam K.S., Ghuman A.S., Boshyan J., Schmidt A.M., Dale A.M., et al. Top-down facilitation of visual recognition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2006, 103(2):449-454.
7. Bar M., Ullman S. Spatial context in recognition. Perception 1996, 25(3):343-352.
8. Barcelo F., Suwazono S., Knight R.T. Prefrontal modulation of visual processing in humans. Nature Neuroscience 2000, 3(4):399-403.
9. Barrett S.E., Rugg M.D. Event-related potentials and the semantic matching of pictures. Brain and Cognition 1990, 14(2):201-212.
10. Bays P.M., Husain M. Active inhibition and memory promote exploration and search of natural scenes. Journal of Vision 2012, 12:8.
11. Bentin S., Allison T., Puce A., Perez E., McCarthy G. Electrophysiological studies of face perception in humans. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1996, 8(6):551-565.
12. Bentin S., Deouell L.Y., Soroker N. Selective visual streaming in face recognition: Evidence from developmental prosopagnosia. Neuroreport 1999, 10(4):823-827.
13. Bichot N.P., Schall J.D. Priming in macaque frontal cortex during popout visual search: Feature-based facilitation and location-based inhibition of return. The Journal of Neuroscience 2002, 22(11):4675-4685.
14. Biederman I. On the semantics of a glance at a scene. Perceptual organization 1981, 213-253. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc., Hillsdale, New Jersey. M. Kubovy, J.R. Pomerantz (Eds.).
15. Biederman I., Glass A.L., Stacy E.W. Searching for objects in real-world scences. Journal of Experimental Psychology 1973, 97(1):22-27.
16. Biederman I., Mezzanotte R.J., Rabinowitz J.C. Scene perception: Detecting and judging objects undergoing relational violations. Cognitive Psychology 1982, 14(2):143-177.
17. Biederman I., Rabinowitz J.C., Glass A.L., Stacy E.W. Information extracted from a glance at a scene. Journal of Experimental Psychology 1974, 103(3):597-600.
18. Boyce S.J., Pollatsek A. Identification of objects in scenes-the role of scene background in object naming. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition 1992, 18(3):531-543.
19. Boyce S.J., Pollatsek A., Rayner K. Effect of background information on object identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Perception and Performance 1989, 15(3):556-566.
20. Braun J., Julesz B. Withdrawing attention at little or no cost: Detection and discrimination tasks. Perception and Psychophysics 1998, 60(1):1-23.
21. Brockmole J.R., Henderson J.M. Recognition and attention guidance during contextual cueing in real-world scenes: Evidence from eye. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2006, 59(7):1177-1187.
22. Carlson T., Tovar D.A., Alink A., Kriegeskorte N. Representational dynamics of object vision: The first 1000ms. Journal of Vision 2013, 13(10).
23. Chong S.C., Treisman A. Representation of statistical properties. Vision Research 2003, 43(4):393-404. (doi: Pii S0042-6989(02)00596-5).
24. Chun M.M., Jiang Y.H. Contextual cueing: Implicit learning and memory of visual context guides spatial attention. Cognitive Psychology 1998, 36(1):28-71.
25. Chun M.M., Jiang Y.H. Top-down attentional guidance based on implicit learning of visual covariation. Psychological Science 1999, 10:360-365.
26. Codispoti M., Ferrari V., Junghöfer M., Schupp H.T. The categorization of natural scenes: Brain attention networks revealed by dense sensor ERPs. Neuroimage 2006, 32(2):583-591.
27. Corbetta M., Shulman G.L. Control of goal-directed and stimulus-driven attention in the brain. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2002, 3(3):201-215.
28. Cumming G. The new statistics: Why and how. Psychological Science 2014, 25(1):7-29.
29. Davenport J.L., Potter M.C. Scene consistency in object and background perception. Psychological Science 2004, 15(8):559-564.
30. De Graef P. Scene-context effects and models of real-world perception. Eye movements and visual cognition: Scene perception and reading 1992, 243-259. Springer, New York. K. Rayner (Ed.).
31. De Graef P., Christiaens D., Dydewalle G. Perceptual effects of scene context on object identification. Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung 1990, 52(4):317-329.
32. Demiral Ş.B., Malcolm G.L., Henderson J.M. ERP correlates of spatially incongruent object identification during scene viewing: Contextual expectancy versus simultaneous processing. Neuropsychologia 2012, 50:1271-1285.
33. Doniger G.M., Foxe J.J., Murray M.M., Higgins B.A., Snodgrass J.G., Schroeder C.E., et al. Activation timecourse of ventral visual stream object-recognition areas: High density electrical mapping of perceptual closure processes. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2000, 12(4):615-621.
34. Dorris M.C., Klein R.M., Everling S., Munoz D.P. Contribution of the primate superior colliculus to inhibition of return. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2002, 14(8):1256-1263.
35. Eriksen C.W., Hoffman J.E. Extent of processing of noise elements during selective encoding from visual-displays. Perception and Psychophysics 1973, 14(1):155-160.
36. Evans E., Treisman A. Perception of objects in natural scenes: Is it really attention free?. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2005, 31:1476-1492.
37. Fecteau J.H., Munoz D.P. Correlates of capture of attention and inhibition of return across stages of visual processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2005, 17(11):1714-1727.
38. Fiser J., Aslin R. Unsupervised statistical learning of higher-order spatial structures from visual scenes. Psychological Science 2001, 12(6):499.
39. Folk C.L., Leber A.B., Egeth H.E. Made you blink! Contingent attentional capture produces a spatial blink. Perception & Psychophysics 2002, 64(5):741-753.
40. Folk C.L., Remington R.W., Johnston J.C. Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Perception and Performance 1992, 18(4):1030-1044.
41. Folstein J.R., Van Petten C., Rose S.A. Novelty and conflict in the categorization of complex stimuli. Psychophysiology 2008, 45(3):467-479.
42. Friedman A. Framing pictures-Role of knowledge in automatized encoding and memory for gist. Journal of Experimental Psychology-General 1979, 108(3):316-355.
43. Ganis G., Kutas M. An electrophysiological study of scene effects on object identification. Cognitive Brain Research 2003, 16(2):123-144.
44. Goffaux V., Jacques C., Mouraux A., Oliva A., Schyns P., Rossion B. Diagnostic colours contribute to the early stages of scene categorization: Behavioural and neurophysiological evidence. Visual Cognition 2005, 12(6):878-892.
45. Gosling A., Eimer M. An event-related brain potential study of explicit face recognition. Neuropsychologia 2011, 49(9):2736-2745.
46. Graboi D., Lisman J. Recognition by top-down and bottom-up processing in cortex: The control of selective attention. Journal of Neurophysiology 2003, 90(2):798-810. 10.1152/jn.00777.2002.
47. Hamm J.P., Johnson B.W., Kirk I.J. Comparison of the N300 and N400 ERPs to picture stimuli in congruent and incongruent contexts. Clinical Neurophysiology 2002, 113(8):1339-1350.
48. Henderson J.M., Pollatsek A., Rayner K. Covert visual-attention and extrafoveal information use during object identification. Perception and Psychophysics 1989, 45(3):196-208.
49. Henderson J.M., Weeks P.A., Hollingworth A. The effects of semantic consistency on eye movements during complex scene viewing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1999, 25(1):210-228.
50. Henson R.N., Rylands A., Ross E., Vuilleumeir P., Rugg M.D. The effect of repetition lag on electrophysiological and haemodynamic correlates of visual object priming. Neuroimage 2004, 21:1674-1689.
51. Hidalgo-Sotelo B., Oliva A., Torralba A. Human learning of contextual priors for object search: Where does the time go?. Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition 2005, 3:86-93.
52. Holcomb P.J., McPherson W.B. Event-related brain potentials reflect semantic priming in an object decision task. Brain and Cognition 1994, 24(2):259-276.
53. Hollingworth A., Henderson J.M. Does consistent scene context facilitate object perception?. Journal of Experimental Psychology-General 1998, 127(4):398-415.
54. Hollingworth A., Henderson J.M. Object identification is isolated from scene semantic constraint: Evidence from object type and token discrimination. Acta Psychologica 1999, 102(2-3):319-343.
55. Hooge I.T.C., Frens M.A. Inhibition of saccade return (ISR): Spatio-temporal properties of saccade programming. Vision Research 2000, 40(24):3415-3426.
56. Hooge I.T.C., Over E.A., van Wezel R.J., Frens M.A. Inhibition of return is not a foraging facilitator in saccadic search and free viewing. Vision Research 2005, 45(14):1901-1908.
57. Hopfinger J.B., Buonocore M.H., Mangun G.R. The neural mechanisms of top-down attentional control. Nature Neuroscience 2000, 3(3):284-291.
58. Humphreys G., Riddoch M., Price C. Top-down processes in object identification: Evidence from experimental psychology, neuropsychology and functional anatomy. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 1997, 352(1358):1275.
59. Hung C.P., Kreiman G., Poggio T., DiCarlo J.J. Fast readout of object identity from macaque inferior temporal cortex. Science 2005, 310(5749):863-866.
60. Itti L., Koch C. A saliency-based search mechanism for overt and covert shifts of visual attention. Vision Research 2000, 40(10-12):1489-1506.
61. Jung T.P., Makeig S., Humphries C., Lee T.W., McKeown M.J., Iragui V., et al. Removing electroencephalographic artifacts by blind source separation. Psychophysiology 2000, 37(2):163-178.
62. Kirchner H., Thorpe S.J. Ultra-rapid object detection with saccadic eye movements: Visual processing speed revisited. Vision Research 2006, 46(11):1762-1776. 10.1016/j.visres.2005.10.002.
63. Klein R.M. Inhibitory tagging system facilitates visual search. Nature 1988, 334:430-431.
64. Klein R.M. Inhibition of return. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2000, 4(4):138-147.
65. Klein R.M., MacInnes W.J. Inhibition of return is a foraging facilitator in visual search. Psychological Science 1999, 10(4):346-352.
66. Kosslyn S.M. Image and brain 1994, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
67. Kutas M., Hillyard S.A. Event-related brain potentials to semantically inappropriate and surprisingly large words. Biological Psychology 1980, 11(2):99-116.
68. Kutas M., Hillyard S.A. Reading Senseless Sentences-Brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. Science 1980, 207(4427):203-205.
69. Lee D.K., Koch C., Braun J. Attentional capacity is undifferentiated: Concurrent discrimination of form, color, and motion. Perception and Psychophysics 1999, 61(7):1241-1255.
70. Li F.F., VanRullen R., Koch C., Perona P. Rapid natural scene categorization in the near absence of attention. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2002, 99(14):9596-9601.
71. Loftus G.R., Mackworth N.H. Cognitive determinants of fixation location during picture viewing. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Perception and Performance 1978, 4(4):565-572.
72. Logothetis N.K., Leopold D.A., Sheinberg D.L. What is rivalling during binocular rivalry?. Nature 1996, 380(6575):621-624.
73. Maris E., Oostenveld R. Nonparametric statistical testing of EEG-and MEG-data. Journal of Neuroscience Methods 2007, 164(1):177-190.
74. McCarthy G., Wood C.C. Scalp distributions of event-related potentials-An ambiguity associated with analysis of variance models. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology 1985, 62(3):203-208.
75. McPherson W.B., Holcomb P.J. An electrophysiological investigation of semantic priming with pictures of real objects. Psychophysiology 1999, 36(1):53-65.
76. Mechelli A., Price C.J., Friston K.J., Ishai A. Where bottom-up meets top-down: Neuronal interactions during perception and imagery. Cerebral Cortex 2004, 14(11):1256-1265. 10.1093/cercor/bhh087.
77. Merigan W.H., Maunsell J.H.R. How parallel are the primate visual pathways. Annual Review of Neuroscience 1993, 16:369-402.
78. Mirpour K., Arcizet F., Ong W.S., Bisley J.W. Been there, seen that: A neural mechanism for performing efficient visual search. Journal of Neurophysiology 2009, 102(6):3481-3491.
79. Miyashita Y., Hayashi T. Neural representation of visual objects: Encoding and top-down activation. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 2000, 10(2):187-194.
80. Mudrik L., Deouell L.Y., Lamy D. Scene congruency biases binocular rivalry. Consciousness and Cognition 2011, 20:756-767.
81. Mudrik L., Lamy D., Deouell L.Y. ERP evidence for context congruity effects during simultaneous object-scene processing. Neuropsychologia 2010, 48(2):507-517. 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.10.011.
82. Muller H.J., Rabbitt P.M.A. Reflexive and voluntary orienting of visual-attention-Time course of activation and resistance to interruption. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Perception and Performance 1989, 15(2):315-330.
83. Munneke J., Brentari V., Peelen M.V. The influence of scene context on object recognition is independent of attentional focus. Frontiers in Psychology 2013, 4:552.
84. Nakayama K., Mackeben M. Sustained and transient components of focal visual-attention. Vision Research 1989, 29(11):1631-1647.
85. Neumann D., Gegenfurtner K. Image retrieval and perceptual similarity. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception (TAP) 2006, 3(1):31-47.
86. Oliva A., Schyns P.G. Diagnostic colors mediate scene recognition. Cognitive Psychology 2000, 41(2):176-210.
87. Oliva A., Torralba A. Modeling the shape of the scene: A holistic representation of the spatial envelope. International Journal of Computer Vision 2001, 42(3):145-175.
88. Oliva A., Torralba A. Building the gist of a scene: The role of global image features in recognition. Progress in Brain Research 2006, 155:23-36.
89. Oliva A., Wolfe J.M., Arsenio H.C. Panoramic search: The interaction of memory and vision in search through a familiar scene. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Perception and Performance 2004, 30(6):1132-1146. 10.1037/0096-1523.30.6.1132.
90. Palmer S.E. Effects of contextual scenes on identification of objects. Memory and Cognition 1975, 3(5):519-526.
91. Pascual-Leone A., Walsh V. Fast back projections from the motion to the primary visual area necessary for visual awareness. Science 2001, 292(5516):510-512.
92. Pashler H., Harris C.R. Is the replicability crisis overblown? Three arguments examined. Perspectives on Psychological Science 2012, 7(6):531-536.
93. Picton T.W., Bentin S., Berg P., Donchin E., Hillyard S.A., Johnson R., et al. Guidelines for using human event-related potentials to study cognition: Recording standards and publication criteria. Psychophysiology 2000, 37(2):127-152.
94. Posner M.I. Orienting of attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 1980, 32(Feb):3-25.
95. Posner M.I., Cohen Y. Components of visual orienting. Attention and performance 1984, Vol. X:531-556. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
96. Posner M.I., Rafal R.D., Choate L.S., Vaughan J. Inhibition of return: Neural basis and function. Cognitive Neuropsychology 1985, 2(3):211-228.
97. Potter M.C., Staub A., O'Connor D.H. Pictorial and conceptual representation of glimpsed pictures. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Perception and Performance 2004, 30(3):478-489.
98. Ranganath C., DeGutis J., D'Esposito M. Category-specific modulation of inferior temporal activity during working memory encoding and maintenance. Cognitive Brain Research 2004, 20(1):37-45. 10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2003.11.017.
99. Rayner K., Pollatsek A. Eye movements and scene perception. Canadian Journal of Psychology 1992, 46(3):342-376.
100. Schendan H.E., Kutas M. Neurophysiological evidence for two processing times for visual object identification. Neuropsychologia 2002, 40(7):931-945.
101. Schendan H.E., Kutas M. Time course of processes and representations supporting visual object identification and memory. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2003, 15(1):111-135.
102. Schendan H.E., Kutas M. Neurophysiological evidence for the time course of activation of global shape, part, and local contour representations during visual object categorization and memory. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2007, 19(5):734-749.
103. Schendan H.E., Maher S.M. Object knowledge during entry-level categorization is activated and modified by implicit memory after 200ms. Neuroimage 2008, 44(4):1423-1438.
104. Serences J.T., Shomstein S., Leber A.B., Golay X., Egeth H.E., Yantis S. Coordination of voluntary and stimulus-driven attentional control in human cortex. Psychological Science 2005, 16(2):114-122.
105. Sitnikova T., Holcomb P.J., Kiyonaga K.A., Kuperberg G.R. Two neurocognitive mechanisms of semantic integration during the comprehension of visual real-world events. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2008, 20(11):2037-2057.
106. Sun H.-M., Simon-Dack S.L., Gordon R.D., Teder W.A. Contextual influences on rapid object categorization in natural scenes. Brain Research 2011, 1398:40-54.
107. Thorpe C., Fize D., Marlot C. Speed of processing in the human visual system. Nature 1996, 381:520-522.
108. Torralba A., Oliva A., Castelhano M.S., Henderson J.M. Contextual guidance of eye movements and attention in real-world scenes: The role of global features in object search. Psychological Review 2006, 113(4):766-786.
109. Underwood G., Foulsham T. Visual saliency and semantic incongruency influence eye movements when inspecting pictures. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2006, 59(11):1931-1949.
110. Underwood G., Foulsham T., van Loon E., Humphreys L., Bloyce J. Eye movements during scene inspection: A test of the saliency map hypothesis. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 2006, 18(3):321-342.
111. Underwood G., Templeman E., Lamming L., Foulsham T. Is attention necessary for object identification? Evidence from eye movements during the inspection of real-world scenes. Consciousness and cognition 2008, 17(1):159-170.
112. VanRullen R., Thorpe S.J. The time course of visual processing: From early perception to decision-making. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2001, 13(4):454-461.
113. Võ M.L.-H., Henderson J.M. Does gravity matter? Effects of semantic and syntactic inconsistencies on the allocation of attention during scene perception. Journal of Vision 2009, 9(3).
114. Võ M.L.-H., Henderson J.M. Object-scene inconsistencies do not capture gaze: Evidence from the flash-preview moving-window paradigm. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 2011, 73(6):1742-1753.
115. Võ M.L.-H., Wolfe J.M. Differential electrophysiological signatures of semantic and syntactic scene processing. Psychological science 2013, 24:1816-1823.
116. Zheng X., Mondloch C.J., Segalowitz S.J. The timing of individual face recognition in the brain. Neuropsychologia 2012, 50(7):1451-1461.