HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 94/1/576    most recent 00366.2004v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (3) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by van der Smagt, M. J. Articles by Albright, T. D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by van der Smagt, M. J. Articles by Albright, T. D.

Contextual Masking of Oriented Lines: Interactions Between Surface Segmentation Cues

¹Howard Hughes Medical Institute and ²Systems Neurobiology Laboratories, Salk Institute for Biological Studies, La Jolla, California; and ³Max-Planck-Institut für Biologische Kybernetik, Tübingen, Germany

Submitted 9 April 2004; accepted in final form 21 February 2005

The ability of human observers to detect and discriminate a single feature of a visual image deteriorates markedly when the targeted feature is surrounded by others of a similar kind. This perceptual masking is mirrored by the suppressive effects of surround stimulation on the responses of neurons in primary visual cortex (area V1). Both perceptual and neuronal masking effects are partially relieved, however, if the targeted image feature is distinguished from surrounding features along some dimension, such as contour orientation. Masking relief is likely to play an important role in perceptual segmentation of complex images. Because dissimilar surfaces usually differ along multiple feature dimensions, we tested the possibility that those differences may influence segmentation in an invariant manner. As expected, we found that the presence of surrounding features resulted in perceptual masking and neuronal response suppression in area V1, but that either orientation or contrast polarity differences between the target and surrounding features was sufficient to partially relieve these effects. Simultaneous differences along both dimensions, however, yielded no greater relief from masking than did either difference alone. Although the averaged neuronal effects of orientation polarity cues were thus invariant, the time course over which these effects emerged after each stimulus appearance was different for the two cues. These findings refine our understanding of the functions of nonclassical receptive fields, and they support a key role for V1 neurons in surface segmentation.