Biomedical subjects

Michèle Fabre-Thorpe

Publications and source records attributed to Michèle Fabre-Thorpe.

14 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2005

Rapid categorization of foveal and extrafoveal natural images: associated ERPs and effects of lateralization.

Humans are fast and accurate at performing an animal categorization task with natural photographs briefly flashed centrally. Here, this central categorization task is compared to a three position task in which photographs could appear randomly either centrally, or at 3.6 degrees eccentricity (right or left) of the fixation point. A mild behavioral impairment was found with peripheral stimuli with no evidence in support of hemispheric superiority; but enlarging the window of spatial attention to three possible stimuli locations had no behavioral cost on the processing of central images. Performance in the central categorization task has been associated with a large difference between the potentials evoked to target and non-target correct trials, starting about 150 ms after stimulus onset on frontal sites. Present results show that this activity originates within extrastriate visual cortices and probably reflects perceptual stimuli differences processed within areas involved in object recognition. Latencies, slopes, and peak amplitudes of this differential activity were invariant to stimulus position and attentional load. Stimulus location uncertainty and lateralization did not affect speed of visual processing.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Rapid categorization of natural scenes in monkeys: target predictability and processing speed.

Three monkeys performed a categorization task and a recognition task with briefly flashed natural images, using in alternation either a large variety of familiar target images (animal or food) or a single (totally predictable) target. The processing time was 20 ms shorter in the recognition task in which false alarms showed that monkeys relied on low-level cues (color, form, orientation, etc.). The 20-ms additional delay necessary in monkeys to perform the categorization task is compared with the 40-ms delay previously found for humans performing similar tasks. With such short additional processing time, it is argued that neither monkeys nor humans have time to develop a fully integrated object representation in the categorization task and must rely on coarse intermediate representations.

Animals↗

PubMed2005

The time course of visual processing: backward masking and natural scene categorisation.

Human observers are very good at deciding whether briefly flashed novel images contain an animal and previous work has shown that the underlying visual processing can be performed in under 150 ms. Here we used a masking paradigm to determine how information accumulates over time during such high-level categorisation tasks. As the delay between test image and mask is increased, both behavioural accuracy and differential ERP amplitude rapidly increase to reach asymptotic levels around 40-60 ms. Such results imply that processing at each stage in the visual system is remarkably rapid, with information accumulating almost continuously following the onset of activation.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Rapid categorization of achromatic natural scenes: how robust at very low contrasts?

The human visual system is remarkably good at categorizing objects even in challenging visual conditions. Here we specifically assessed the robustness of the visual system in the face of large contrast variations in a high-level categorization task using natural images. Human subjects performed a go/no-go animal/nonanimal categorization task with briefly flashed grey level images. Performance was analysed for a large range of contrast conditions randomly presented to the subjects and varying from normal to 3% of initial contrast. Accuracy was very robust and subjects were performing well above chance level (approximately 70% correct) with only 10-12% of initial contrast. Accuracy decreased with contrast reduction but reached chance level only in the most extreme condition (3% of initial contrast). Conversely, the maximal increase in mean reaction time was approximately 60 ms (at 8% of initial contrast); it then remained stable with further contrast reductions. Associated ERPs recorded on correct target and distractor trials showed a clear differential effect whose amplitude and peak latency were correlated respectively with task accuracy and mean reaction times. These data show the strong robustness of the visual system in object categorization at very low contrast. They suggest that magnocellular information could play a role in ventral stream visual functions such as object recognition. Performance may rely on early object representations which lack the details provided subsequently by the parvocellular system but contain enough information to reach decision in the categorization task.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

Spatiotemporal analyses of the N170 for human faces, animal faces and objects in natural scenes.

We assessed the specificity to human faces of the N170 ERP component in the context of natural scenes. Subjects categorized photographs containing human faces, animal faces and various objects. Spatiotemporal topography analyses were performed on the individual ERP data. ERPs elicited by animal faces were similar to human faces ERPs but with a delayed face activity. In the N170 time window, ERPs to human and animal faces had a different topography compared with object ERPs. Such data suggest that N170 generators might process various stimuli with a coarse facial organization and show the care that must be taken in comparing scalp signal to faces and other objects as they are probably generated, at least partially, by different cortical sources.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

Animal and human faces in natural scenes: How specific to human faces is the N170 ERP component?

The N170 is an event-related potential component reported to be very sensitive to human face stimuli. This study investigated the specificity of the N170, as well as its sensitivity to inversion and task status when subjects had to categorize either human or animal faces in the context of upright and inverted natural scenes. A conspicuous N170 was recorded for both face categories. Pictures of animal faces were associated with a N170 of similar amplitude compared to pictures of human faces, but with delayed peak latency. Picture inversion enhanced N170 amplitude for human faces and delayed its peak for both human and animal faces. Finally, whether processed as targets or non-targets, depending on the task, both human and animal face N170 were identical. Thus, human faces in natural scenes elicit a clear but non-specific N170 that is not modulated by task status. What appears to be specific to human faces is the strength of the inversion effect.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

Interaction of top-down and bottom-up processing in the fast visual analysis of natural scenes.

The influence of task requirements on the fast visual processing of natural scenes was studied in 14 human subjects performing in alternation an "animal" categorization task and a single-photograph recognition task. Target photographs were randomly mixed with non-target images and flashed for only 20 ms. Subjects had to respond to targets within 1 s. Processing time for image-recognition was 30-40 ms shorter than for the categorization task, both for the fastest behavioral responses and for the latency at which event related potentials evoked by target and non-target stimuli started to diverge. The faster processing in image-recognition is shown to be due to the use of low-level cues, but source analysis produced evidence that, regardless of the task, the dipoles accounting for the differential activity had the same localization and orientation in the occipito-temporal cortex. We suggest that both tasks involve the same visual pathway and the same decisional brain area but because of the total predictability of the target in the image recognition task, the first wave of bottom-up feed-forward information is speeded up by top-down influences that might originate in the prefrontal cortex and preset lower levels of the visual pathway to the known target features.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

How parallel is visual processing in the ventral pathway?

Visual object perception is usually studied by presenting one object at a time at the fovea. However, the world around us is composed of multiple objects. The way our visual system deals with this complexity has remained controversial in the literature. Some models claim that the ventral pathway, a set of visual cortical areas responsible for object recognition, can process only one or very few objects at a time without ambiguity. Other models argue in favor of a massively parallel processing of objects in a scene. Recent experiments in monkeys have provided important data about this issue. The ventral pathway seems to be able to perform complex analyses on several objects simultaneously, but only during a short time period. Subsequently only one or very few objects are explicitly selected and consciously perceived. Here, we survey the implications of these new findings for our understanding of object processing.

Consciousness↗

PubMed2004

Processing of one, two or four natural scenes in humans: the limits of parallelism.

The visual processing of objects in natural scenes is fast and efficient, as indexed by behavioral and ERP data [Nature 381 (1996) 520]. The results from a recent experiment suggested that such fast routines work in parallel across the visual field when subjects were presented with two natural scenes simultaneously [Nature Neurosci. 5 (2002) 629]. In the present experiment, the visual system was driven to its limits by presenting one, two or four scenes simultaneously. Behavior and ERP reveal a clear cost in processing an increasing number of scenes. However, a parallel-late selection model can still account for the results. This model is developed and discussed with reference to behavioral, single-unit and ERP data.

Electroencephalography↗

PubMed2003

Visual categorization: accessing abstraction in non-human primates.

Evolution might have set the basic foundations for abstract mental representation long ago. Because of language, mental abilities would have reached different degrees of sophistication in mammals and in humans but would be, essentially, of the same nature. Thus, humans and animals might rely on the same basic mechanisms that could be masked in humans by the use of sophisticated strategies. In this paper, monkey and human abilities are compared in a variety of perceptual tasks including visual categorization to assess behavioural similarities and dissimilarities, and to determine the level of abstraction of monkeys' mental representations. The question of how these abstract representations might be encoded in the brain is then addressed. A comparative study of the neural processing underlying abstract cognitive operations in animals and humans might help to understand when abstraction emerged in the phylogenetic scale, and how it increased in complexity.

Animals↗

PubMed2003

Taking the MAX from neuronal responses.

By taking the MAX from their inputs, neurons in the ventral visual pathway might preserve their selectivity even when stimulated with natural scenes. This computational hypothesis has received recent direct physiological evidence from recordings of V4 neuronal responses, in a recent study by Gawne and Martin (2002). Object vision might rely more heavily on parallel processing than generally thought.

Journal Article↗

PubMed2003

Is it an animal? Is it a human face? Fast processing in upright and inverted natural scenes.

Object categorization can be extremely fast. But among all objects, human faces might hold a special status that could depend on a specialized module. Visual processing could thus be faster for faces than for any other kind of object. Moreover, because face processing might rely on facial configuration, it could be more disrupted by stimulus inversion. Here we report two experiments that compared the rapid categorization of human faces and animals or animal faces in the context of upright and inverted natural scenes. In Experiment 1, the natural scenes contained human faces and animals in a full range of scales from close-up to far views. In Experiment 2, targets were restricted to close-ups of human faces and animal faces. Both experiments revealed the remarkable object processing efficiency of our visual system and further showed (1) virtually no advantage for faces over animals; (2) very little performance impairment with inversion; and (3) greater sensitivity of faces to inversion. These results are interpreted within the framework of a unique system for object processing in the ventral pathway. In this system, evidence would accumulate very quickly and efficiently to categorize visual objects, without involving a face module or a mental rotation mechanism. It is further suggested that rapid object categorization in natural scenes might not rely on high-level features but rather on features of intermediate complexity.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

Parallel processing in high-level categorization of natural images.

Models of visual processing often include an initial parallel stage that is restricted to relatively low-level features, whereas activation of higher-level object descriptions is generally assumed to require attention. Here we report that even high-level object representations can be accessed in parallel: in a rapid animal versus non-animal categorization task, both behavioral and electrophysiological data show that human subjects were as fast at responding to two simultaneously presented natural images as they were to a single one. The implication is that even complex natural images can be processed in parallel without the need for sequential focal attention.

Adult↗

PubMed1996

Shift of laterality and compared analysis of paw performances in cats during practice of a visuomotor task.

Paw preference and performance were analyzed during early and late practice in 12 adult cats that reached toward a moving target. A strong preference for left-paw use was observed early in training. It was still present after practice despite a shift toward right-paw use. Comparing paw performance showed that the left paw was more accurate and quicker to trigger the movement during early practice, whereas after practice, it was the preferred paw (whether right or left) that triggered faster movement. The strong original left-paw bias could reflect the specialization of the right hemisphere in processing spatial information. Its weakening with practice could reflect the ability of the nonspecialized hemisphere to learn how to deal with the task.

Animals↗