Biomedical subjects

Armando Bertone

Publications and source records attributed to Armando Bertone.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Demonstrations of decreased sensitivity to complex motion information not enough to propose an autism-specific neural etiology.

Interest regarding neural information processing in autism is growing because atypical perceptual abilities are a characteristic feature of persons with autism. Central to our review is how characteristic perceptual abilities, referred to as perceptual signatures, can be used to suggest a neural etiology that is specific to autism. We review evidence from studies assessing both motion and form perception and how the resulting perceptual signatures are interpreted within the context of two main hypotheses regarding information processing in autism: the pathway- and complexity-specific hypotheses. We present evidence suggesting that an autism-specific neural etiology based on perceptual abilities can only be made when particular experimental paradigms are used, and that such an etiology is most congruent with the complexity-specific hypothesis.

Autistic Disorder↗

PubMed2006

Defining the nature of motion perception deficits in glaucoma using simple and complex motion stimuli.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to determine the nature of motion perception deficits in primary open-angle glaucoma by measuring the sensitivity of simple (luminance-defined) and complex (texture-defined) motion, the latter requiring supplementary neural processing to be resolved. These findings will help address the possible extent of the cortical damage in glaucoma that has been recently demonstrated by anatomic and physiological studies. They also serve the purpose of establishing which motion paradigms would be most appropriate for assessing glaucoma-related functional loss. METHODS: Direction-identification thresholds for first-order and second-order motion were measured for 26 patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (for both phakic and pseudophakic) and 18 nonglaucomatous observers. RESULTS: The glaucomatous observers showed significantly increased motion thresholds for both first- and second-order motion conditions when compared with nonglaucomatous observers. However, the relative increase in threshold for first-order motion did not differ significantly from that of second-order motion. CONCLUSIONS: These findings imply that there is no measurable higher-level cortical function damage caused by the glaucomatous process because no greater loss in second-order motion was observed. Based on the results, we suggest that motion paradigms used to assess functional loss in primary open-angle glaucoma should consist of simple, first-order type stimuli to minimize potential confounds such as those introduced by both the normal and pathologic aging process on complex motion processing (i.e., perimetry using complex motion stimuli).

Aged↗

PubMed2005

Enhanced and diminished visuo-spatial information processing in autism depends on stimulus complexity.

Visuo-perceptual processing in autism is characterized by intact or enhanced performance on static spatial tasks and inferior performance on dynamic tasks, suggesting a deficit of dorsal visual stream processing in autism. However, previous findings by Bertone et al. indicate that neuro-integrative mechanisms used to detect complex motion, rather than motion perception per se, may be impaired in autism. We present here the first demonstration of concurrent enhanced and decreased performance in autism on the same visuo-spatial static task, wherein the only factor dichotomizing performance was the neural complexity required to discriminate grating orientation. The ability of persons with autism was found to be superior for identifying the orientation of simple, luminance-defined (or first-order) gratings but inferior for complex, texture-defined (or second-order) gratings. Using a flicker contrast sensitivity task, we demonstrated that this finding is probably not due to abnormal information processing at a sub-cortical level (magnocellular and parvocellular functioning). Together, these findings are interpreted as a clear indication of altered low-level perceptual information processing in autism, and confirm that the deficits and assets observed in autistic visual perception are contingent on the complexity of the neural network required to process a given type of visual stimulus. We suggest that atypical neural connectivity, resulting in enhanced lateral inhibition, may account for both enhanced and decreased low-level information processing in autism.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2003

Motion perception in autism: a "complex" issue.

We present the first assessment of motion sensitivity for persons with autism and normal intelligence using motion patterns that require neural processing mechanisms of varying complexity. Compared to matched controls, our results demonstrate that the motion sensitivity of observers with autism is similar to that of nonautistic observers for different types of first-order (luminance-defined) motion stimuli, but significantly decreased for the same types of second-order (texture-defined) stimuli. The latter class of motion stimuli has been demonstrated to require additional neural computation to be processed adequately. This finding may reflect less efficient integrative functioning of the neural mechanisms that mediate visuoperceptual processing in autism. The contribution of this finding with regards to abnormal perceptual integration in autism, its effect on cognitive operations, and possible behavioral implications are discussed.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2003

How is complex second-order motion processed?

Converging psychophysical and electrophysiological evidence suggests that first-order (luminance-defined) complex motion types i.e., radial and rotational motion, are processed by specialized extrastriate motion mechanisms. We ask whether radial and rotational second-order (texture-defined) motion patterns are processed in a similar manner. The motion sensitivity to translating, radiating and rotating motion patterns of both first-order (luminance-modulated noise) and second-order (contrast-modulated noise) were measured for patterns presented at four different exposure durations (106, 240, 500 and 750 ms). No significant difference in motion sensitivity was found across motion type for the first-order motion class across exposure duration (i.e., from 240 to 750 ms) whereas direction-identification thresholds for radiating and rotating second-order motion were significantly greater than that of the second-order translational stimuli. Furthermore, thresholds to all second-order motion stimuli increased at a significantly faster rate with decreasing exposure duration compared to those of first-order motion. Interestingly, simple and complex second-order thresholds increased at similar rates. Taken together, the results suggest that complex second-order motion is not analyzed in a sequential manner. Rather, it seems that the same 'hard-wired' mechanisms responsible for complex first-order motion processing also mediate complex second-order motion, but not before the pre-processing (i.e., rectification) of local second-order motion signals.

Adult↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Visual evoked potentials and reaction time measurements to motion-reversal luminance- and texture-defined stimuli.

PURPOSE: Previous studies have suggested that compared to first-order (FO) motion stimuli, second-order (SO) motion stimuli required more cortical time to be processed. The purpose of this study was: 1- to verify this claim with Visual Evoked Potential (VEP) and eye-hand Reaction Time (RT) measurements and 2- examine if the VEP and RT responses are similarly modulated by the same trigger features of the stimuli. METHODS: The VEPs and eye-hand RT for motion-reversal luminance- (first-order) and texture-defined (second-order) stimuli were recorded from ten normal human subjects. VEPs and RTs were measured for each motion class at eight different modulation depths (from 3 to 100%). RESULTS: Our results reveal that for stimuli of low contrast levels, the SO-FO timing differences are approximately 100 ms (RT) or 20 ms (VEP), while for contrasts >or= 15-20% (VEP) or >or= 50% (RT), the SO-FO difference is no longer significant (p < 0.007), suggesting either that the brain can no longer distinguish SO from FO stimuli or that in spite of the added complexity of SO stimuli the brain takes equal time to process both. CONCLUSION: Interestingly, the above contrast discrepancy in SO-FO resolution threshold suggests that, compared to the VEP, the more psychophysical RT measurement can process and thus distinguish a larger spectrum of motion stimuli, thus further confirming the latter measure of the retinocortical processing time as a valid alternative to the VEP.

Adolescent↗