Response suppression in V1 agrees with psychophysics of surround masking

Barbara Zenger-Landolt, David J. Heeger

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

When a target stimulus is embedded in a high contrast surround, the target appears reduced in contrast and is harder to detect, and neural responses in visual cortex are suppressed. We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and psychophysics to quantitatively compare these physiological and perceptual effects. Observers performed a contrast discrimination task on a contrast-reversing sinusoidal target grating. The target was either presented in isolation or embedded in a high-contrast surround. While observers performed the task, we also measured fMRI responses as a function of target contrast, both with and without a surround. We found that the surround substantially increased the psychophysical thresholds while reducing fMRI responses. The two data sets were compared, on the basis of the assumption that a fixed response difference is required for correct discrimination, and we found that the psychophysics accounted for 96.5% of the variance in the measured V1 responses. The suppression in visual areas V2 and V3 was stronger, too strong to agree with psychophysics. The good quantitative agreement between psychophysical thresholds and V1 responses suggests V1 as a plausible candidate for mediating surround masking.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)6884-6893
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Neuroscience
Volume23
Issue number17
StatePublished - Jul 30 2003

Fingerprint

Psychophysics
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Visual Cortex

Keywords

  • Context effects
  • Contrast
  • FMRI
  • Inhibition
  • Masking
  • Psychophysics
  • Suppression

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Neuroscience(all)

Cite this

Response suppression in V1 agrees with psychophysics of surround masking. / Zenger-Landolt, Barbara; Heeger, David J.

In: Journal of Neuroscience, Vol. 23, No. 17, 30.07.2003, p. 6884-6893.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{f2fe9854142140bfa2679ae336841a8c,
title = "Response suppression in V1 agrees with psychophysics of surround masking",
abstract = "When a target stimulus is embedded in a high contrast surround, the target appears reduced in contrast and is harder to detect, and neural responses in visual cortex are suppressed. We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and psychophysics to quantitatively compare these physiological and perceptual effects. Observers performed a contrast discrimination task on a contrast-reversing sinusoidal target grating. The target was either presented in isolation or embedded in a high-contrast surround. While observers performed the task, we also measured fMRI responses as a function of target contrast, both with and without a surround. We found that the surround substantially increased the psychophysical thresholds while reducing fMRI responses. The two data sets were compared, on the basis of the assumption that a fixed response difference is required for correct discrimination, and we found that the psychophysics accounted for 96.5{\%} of the variance in the measured V1 responses. The suppression in visual areas V2 and V3 was stronger, too strong to agree with psychophysics. The good quantitative agreement between psychophysical thresholds and V1 responses suggests V1 as a plausible candidate for mediating surround masking.",
keywords = "Context effects, Contrast, FMRI, Inhibition, Masking, Psychophysics, Suppression",
author = "Barbara Zenger-Landolt and Heeger, {David J.}",
year = "2003",
month = "7",
day = "30",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "23",
pages = "6884--6893",
journal = "Journal of Neuroscience",
issn = "0270-6474",
publisher = "Society for Neuroscience",
number = "17",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Response suppression in V1 agrees with psychophysics of surround masking

AU - Zenger-Landolt, Barbara

AU - Heeger, David J.

PY - 2003/7/30

Y1 - 2003/7/30

N2 - When a target stimulus is embedded in a high contrast surround, the target appears reduced in contrast and is harder to detect, and neural responses in visual cortex are suppressed. We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and psychophysics to quantitatively compare these physiological and perceptual effects. Observers performed a contrast discrimination task on a contrast-reversing sinusoidal target grating. The target was either presented in isolation or embedded in a high-contrast surround. While observers performed the task, we also measured fMRI responses as a function of target contrast, both with and without a surround. We found that the surround substantially increased the psychophysical thresholds while reducing fMRI responses. The two data sets were compared, on the basis of the assumption that a fixed response difference is required for correct discrimination, and we found that the psychophysics accounted for 96.5% of the variance in the measured V1 responses. The suppression in visual areas V2 and V3 was stronger, too strong to agree with psychophysics. The good quantitative agreement between psychophysical thresholds and V1 responses suggests V1 as a plausible candidate for mediating surround masking.

AB - When a target stimulus is embedded in a high contrast surround, the target appears reduced in contrast and is harder to detect, and neural responses in visual cortex are suppressed. We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and psychophysics to quantitatively compare these physiological and perceptual effects. Observers performed a contrast discrimination task on a contrast-reversing sinusoidal target grating. The target was either presented in isolation or embedded in a high-contrast surround. While observers performed the task, we also measured fMRI responses as a function of target contrast, both with and without a surround. We found that the surround substantially increased the psychophysical thresholds while reducing fMRI responses. The two data sets were compared, on the basis of the assumption that a fixed response difference is required for correct discrimination, and we found that the psychophysics accounted for 96.5% of the variance in the measured V1 responses. The suppression in visual areas V2 and V3 was stronger, too strong to agree with psychophysics. The good quantitative agreement between psychophysical thresholds and V1 responses suggests V1 as a plausible candidate for mediating surround masking.

KW - Context effects

KW - Contrast

KW - FMRI

KW - Inhibition

KW - Masking

KW - Psychophysics

KW - Suppression

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0042133318&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0042133318&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 23

SP - 6884

EP - 6893

JO - Journal of Neuroscience

JF - Journal of Neuroscience

SN - 0270-6474

IS - 17

ER -