Abstract
Reports that visual search is more efficient for vertically than for horizontally shaded objects suggested that search is influenced by a priori knowledge about the source of light. In this study, we examined search for targets defined by the orientation of luminance gradients and measured event-related brain potentials (ERPs). In Experiment 1, we examined search for stimuli that comprised gradual luminance differences. Response times showed the expected orientation anisotropy effect. ERP amplitudes in the P1 latency range were slightly more positive in response to horizontally oriented stimuli, whereas P3 amplitudes were more positive in response to nonsingleton vertically oriented stimuli. Experiment 2 compared search for stimuli that comprised gradual versus step differences in luminance. All the anisotropies that we observed in Experiment 1 could be replicated in Experiment 2. Moreover, these anisotropies were not dependent on the type of the luminance gradient. This finding is inconsistent with the view that search efficiency is influenced by a priori knowledge about the source of light. The behavioral and electrophysiological data are consistent with a context model of visual search. We propose that contextual modulation reduces redundancy and contributes to computing the saliency of visual information by implementing divisive normalization and multiplicative filtering.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adams, W. J. (2007). A common light-prior for visual search, shape and reflectance judgments. Journal of Vision, 7(11, Art. 11), 1–7.
Adams, W. J., Graf, E. W., & Ernst, M. O. (2004). Experience can change the “light-from-above” prior. Nature Neuroscience, 7, 1057–1058.
Aks, D. J., & Enns, J. T. (1992). Visual search for direction of shading is influenced by apparent depth. Perception & Psychophysics, 52, 63–74.
Albrecht, D. G., & Geisler, W. S. (1991). Motion selectivity and the contrast-response function of simple cells in the visual cortex. Visual Neuroscience, 7, 531–546.
Angelucci, A., & Bressloff, P. C. (2006). Contribution of feedforward, lateral and feedback connections to the classical receptive field center and extra-classical receptive field surround of primate V1 neurons. Progress in Brain Research, 154, 93–120.
Barenholtz, E., Cohen, E. H., Feldman, J., & Singh, M. (2003). Detection of change in shape: An advantage for concavities. Cognition, 89, 1–9.
Barlow, H. (2001). Redundancy reduction revisited. Network: Computation in Neural Systems, 12, 241–253.
Brewster, D. (1826). On the optical illusion of the conversion of cameos into intaglios and of intaglios into cameos with an account of other analogous phenomena. Edinburgh Journal of Science, 4, 99–108.
Carandini, M., Demb, J. B., Mante, V., Tolhurst, D. J., Dan, Y., Olshausen, B. A., et al. (2005). Do we know what the early visual system does? Journal of Neuroscience, 25, 10577–10597.
Chun, M. M., & Wolfe, J. M. (1996). Just say no: How are visual searches terminated when there is no target present? Cognitive Psychology, 30, 39–78.
Di Russo, F., Aprile, T., Spitoni, G., & Spinelli, D. (2007). Impaired visual processing of contralesional stimuli in neglect patients: A visual-evoked potential study. Brain, 131, 842–854.
Di Russo, F., Martìnez, A., Sereno, M. I., Pitzalis, S., & Hillyard, S. A. (2002). Cortical sources of the early components of the visual evoked potential. Human Brain Mapping, 15, 95–111.
Duncan, J., & Humphreys, G. W. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity. Psychological Review, 96, 433–458.
Essock, E. A., DeFord, J. K., Hansen, B. C., & Sinai, M. J. (2003). Oblique stimuli are seen best (not worst!) in naturalistic broad-band stimuli: A horizontal effect. Vision Research, 43, 1329–1335.
Gao, D., Mahadevan, V., & Vasconcelos, N. (2008). On the plausibility of the discriminant center-surround hypothesis for visual saliency. Journal of Vision, 8(7, Art. 13), 1–18.
Geisler, W. S. (2008). Visual perception and the statistical properties of natural scenes. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 167–192.
Gratton, G., Coles, M. G., & Donchin, E. (1983). A new method for off-line removal of ocular artifact. Electroencephalography & Clinical Neurophysiology, 55, 468–484.
Hansen, B. C., & Essock, E. A. (2004). A horizontal bias in human visual processing of orientation and its correspondence to the structural components of natural scenes. Journal of Vision, 4, 1044–1060.
Heeger, D. J. (1992). Normalization of cell responses in cat striate cortex. Visual Neuroscience, 9, 181–197.
Hillyard, S. A., Teder-Sälejärvi, W. A., & Münte, T. F. (1998). Temporal dynamics of early perceptual processing. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 8, 202–210.
Hou, C., Pettet, M. W., Vildavski, V. Y., & Norcia, A. M. (2006). Neural correlates of shape-from-shading. Vision Research, 46, 1080–1090.
Hubel, D. H., & Wiesel, T. N. (1962). Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat’s visual cortex. Journal of Physiology, 160, 106–154.
Itti, L., & Baldi, P. (2009). Bayesian surprise attracts human attention. Vision Research, 49, 1295–1306.
Itti, L., & Koch, C. (2001). Computational modelling of visual attention. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2, 194–203.
Jung, R., & Spillmann, L. (1970). Receptive-field estimation and perceptual integration in human vision. In F. A. Young & D. B. Lindsley (Eds.), Early experience and visual information processing in perceptual and reading disorders (pp. 181–197). Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
Kersten, D., Mamassian, P., & Yuille, A. (2004). Object perception as Bayesian inference. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 271–304.
Kleffner, D. A., & Ramachandran, V. S. (1992). On the perception of shape from shading. Perception & Psychophysics, 52, 18–36.
Kok, A. (2001). On the utility of P3 amplitude as a measure of processing capacity. Psychophysiology, 38, 557–577.
Kopp, B. (2008). The P300 component of the event-related brain potential and Bayes’ theorem. In M.-K. Sun (Ed.), Cognitive sciences at the leading edge (pp. 87–96). New York: Nova.
Lee, T. S., Yang, C. F., Romero, R., & Mumford, D. (2002). Neural activity in early visual cortex reflects behavioral experience and higher-order perceptual saliency. Nature Neuroscience, 5, 589–597.
Li, B., Peterson, M. R., & Freeman, R. D. (2003). Oblique effect: A neural basis in the visual cortex. Journal of Neurophysiology, 90, 204–217.
Li, Z. (1999). Contextual influences in V1 as a basis for pop out and asymmetry in visual search. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 96, 10530–10535.
Li, Z. (2002). A saliency map in primary visual cortex. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 9–16.
Luck, S. J. (2005). An introduction to the event-related potential technique. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Luck, S. J., & Hillyard, S. A. (1990). Electrophysiological evidence for parallel and serial processing during visual search. Perception & Psychophysics, 48, 603–617.
Mamassian, P., Jentzsch, I., Bacon, B. A., & Schweinberger, S. R. (2003). Neural correlates of shape from shading. NeuroReport, 14, 971–975.
Michaels, C. F., & Carello, C. (1981). Direct perception. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Miller, J. (1988). A warning about median reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 14, 539–543.
Nothdurft, H. C. (1991). Texture segmentation and pop-out from orientation contrast. Vision Research, 31, 1073–1078.
Palmer, J. (1995). Attention in visual search: Distinguishing four causes of a set size effect. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 4, 118–123.
Picton, T. W., Bentin, S., Berg, P., Donchin, E., Hillyard, S. A., Johnson, R., Jr., et al. (2000). Guidelines for using human eventrelated potentials to study cognition: Recording standards and publication criteria. Psychophysiology, 37, 127–152.
Prados, E., & Faugeras, O. (2006). Shape from shading. In N. Paragios, Y. Chen, & O. Faugeras (Eds.), Handbook of mathematical models in computer vision (pp. 375–388). Berlin: Springer.
Ramachandran, V. S. (1988). Perception of shape from shading. Nature, 331, 163–166.
Ramachandran, V. S., & Rogers-Ramachandran, D. (2008). Seeing is believing. Scientific American Mind, 19, 16–18.
Schwartz, O., & Simoncelli, E. P. (2001). Natural signal statistics and sensory gain control. Nature Neuroscience, 4, 819–825.
Seriès, P., Lorenceau, J., & Frègnac, Y. (2003). The “silent” surround of V1 receptive fields: Theory and experiments. Journal of Physiology, 97, 453–474.
Simoncelli, E. P., & Olshausen, B. A. (2001). Natural image statistics and neural representation. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 24, 1193–1216.
Spencer, K. M., Dien, J., & Donchin, E. (2001). Spatiotemporal analysis of the late ERP responses to deviant stimuli. Psychophysiology, 38, 343–358.
Spillmann, L. (1994). The Hermann grid illusion: A tool for studying human perceptive field organization. Perception, 23, 691–708.
Sun, J., & Perona, P. (1998). Where is the sun? Nature Neuroscience, 1, 183–184.
Thornton, T. L., & Gilden, D. L. (2007). Parallel and serial processes in visual search. Psychological Review, 114, 71–103.
Treisman, A. M., & Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 97–136.
Treisman, A. M., & Gormican, S. (1988). Feature analysis in early vision: Evidence from search asymmetries. Psychological Review, 95, 15–48.
Van Zoest, W., Giesbrecht, B., Enns, J., & Kingstone, A. (2006). New reflections in visual search: Interitem symmetry matters! Psychological Science, 17, 535–542.
Wainwright, M. J., Schwartz, O., & Simoncelli, E. P. (2002). Natural image statistics and divisive normalization: Modeling nonlinearities and adaptation in cortical neurons. In R. P. N. Rao, B. A. Olshausen, & M. S. Lewicki (Eds.), Probabilistic models of the brain: Perception and neural function (pp. 203–222). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Wolfe, J. M. (1998). What can one million trials tell us about visual search? Psychological Science, 9, 33–39.
Wolfe, J. M. (2007). Guided Search 4.0: Current progress with a model of visual search. In W. Gray (Ed.), Integrated models of cognitive systems (pp. 99–119). New York: Oxford University Press.
Wolfe, J. M., & Horowitz, T. S. (2004). What attributes guide the deployment of visual attention and how do they do it? Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 5, 495–501.
Wolfe, J. M., Klempen, N. L., & Shulman, E. P. (1999). Which end is up? Two representations of orientation in visual search. Vision Research, 39, 2075–2086.
Wolfe, J. M., Yee, A., & Friedman-Hill, S. R. (1992). Curvature is a basic feature for visual search tasks. Perception, 21, 465–480.
Wu, M. C., David, S. V., & Gallant, J. L. (2006). Complete functional characterization of sensory neurons by system identification. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 29, 477–505.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kopp, B., Kizilirmak, J., Liebscher, C. et al. Event-related brain potentials and the efficiency of visual search for vertically and horizontally oriented stimuli. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience 10, 523–540 (2010). https://doi.org/10.3758/CABN.10.4.523
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/CABN.10.4.523