Minimal exposure durations reveal visual processing priorities for different stimulus attributes.
Journal
Nature communications
ISSN: 2041-1723
Titre abrégé: Nat Commun
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101528555
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 Oct 2024
02 Oct 2024
Historique:
received:
03
10
2023
accepted:
19
09
2024
medline:
3
10
2024
pubmed:
3
10
2024
entrez:
2
10
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Human vision can detect a single photon, but the minimal exposure required to extract meaning from stimulation remains unknown. This requirement cannot be characterised by stimulus energy, because the system is differentially sensitive to attributes defined by configuration rather than physical amplitude. Determining minimal exposure durations required for processing various stimulus attributes can thus reveal the system's priorities. Using a tachistoscope enabling arbitrarily brief displays, we establish minimal durations for processing human faces, a stimulus category whose perception is associated with several well-characterised behavioural and neural markers. Neural and psychophysical measures show a sequence of distinct minimal exposures for stimulation detection, object-level detection, face-specific processing, and emotion-specific processing. Resolving ongoing debates, face orientation affects minimal exposure but emotional expression does not. Awareness emerges with detection, showing no evidence of subliminal perception. These findings inform theories of visual processing and awareness, elucidating the information to which the visual system is attuned.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39358365
doi: 10.1038/s41467-024-52778-5
pii: 10.1038/s41467-024-52778-5
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
8523Subventions
Organisme : Ministry of Education, Government of Chile | Comisión Nacional de Investigación Científica y Tecnológica (National Commission for Scientific and Technological Research)
ID : 1240899
Organisme : RCUK | Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC)
ID : ES/L01064X/1
Organisme : EC | EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation H2020 | H2020 Priority Excellent Science | H2020 European Research Council (H2020 Excellent Science - European Research Council)
ID : EXPERIENCE - ADG101055060
Organisme : EC | EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation H2020 | H2020 Priority Excellent Science | H2020 European Research Council (H2020 Excellent Science - European Research Council)
ID : EXPERIENCE - ADG101055060
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Hecht, S., Shlaer, S. & Pirenne, M. H. Energy at the threshold of vision. Science 93, 585–587 (1941).
pubmed: 17795956
doi: 10.1126/science.93.2425.585
Tinsley, J. N. et al. Direct detection of a single photon by humans. Nat. Commun. 7, 12172 (2016).
pubmed: 27434854
pmcid: 4960318
doi: 10.1038/ncomms12172
Fabre-Thorpe, M., Delorme, A., Marlot, C. & Thorpe, S. A limit to the speed of processing in ultra-rapid visual categorization of novel natural scenes. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 13, 171–180 (2001).
pubmed: 11244543
doi: 10.1162/089892901564234
Thorpe, S., Fize, D. & Marlot, C. Speed of processing in the human visual system. Nature 381, 520–522 (1996).
pubmed: 8632824
doi: 10.1038/381520a0
Chuyin, Z., Koh, Z. H., Gallagher, R., Nishimoto, S. & Tsuchiya, N. What can we experience and report on a rapidly presented image? Intersubjective measures of specificity of freely reported contents of consciousness [version 3; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Res. 11, 69 (2022).
Codispoti, M., Mazzetti, M. & Bradley, M. M. Unmasking emotion: exposure duration and emotional engagement. Psychophysiology 46, 731–738 (2009).
pubmed: 19386053
doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2009.00804.x
Greene, M. R. & Oliva, A. The briefest of glances: the time course of natural scene understanding. Psychol. Sci. 4, 464–472(2009).
Bentin, S., Allison, T., Puce, A., Perez, E. & McCarthy, G. Electrophysiological studies of face perception in humans. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 8, 551–565 (1996).
pubmed: 20740065
pmcid: 2927138
doi: 10.1162/jocn.1996.8.6.551
Dehaene, S. & Naccache, L. Towards a cognitive neuroscience of consciousness: basic evidence and a workspace framework. Cognition 79, 1–37 (2001).
pubmed: 11164022
doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(00)00123-2
Mashour, G. A., Roelfsema, P., Changeux, J.-P. & Dehaene, S. Conscious processing and the global neuronal workspace hypothesis. Neuron 105, 776–798 (2020).
pubmed: 32135090
pmcid: 8770991
doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2020.01.026
Lamme, V. A. F. Towards a true neural stance on consciousness. Trends Cogn. Sci. 10, 494–501 (2006).
pubmed: 16997611
doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2006.09.001
Hohwy, J. & Seth, A. Predictive processing as a systematic basis for identifying the neural correlates of consciousness. Philos. Mind Sci. 1, 1–34 (2020).
Sergent, C. et al. Bifurcation in brain dynamics reveals a signature of conscious processing independent of report. Nat. Commun. 12, 1149 (2021).
pubmed: 33608533
pmcid: 7895979
doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-21393-z
Sperdin, H. F., Repnow, M., Herzog, M. H. & Landis, T. An LCD tachistoscope with submillisecond precision. Behav. Res. 45, 1347–1357 (2013).
doi: 10.3758/s13428-012-0311-0
Goodrich, R. I. & Yonelinas, A. P. The effects of face inversion on perceiving- and sensing-based change detection. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 149, 79–93 (2020).
pubmed: 31081665
doi: 10.1037/xge0000618
Kanwisher, N., Tong, F. & Nakayama, K. The effect of face inversion on the human fusiform face area. Cognition 68, B1–B11 (1998).
pubmed: 9775518
doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(98)00035-3
Yovel, G. & Kanwisher, N. The neural basis of the behavioral face-inversion effect. Curr. Biol. 15, 2256–2262 (2005).
pubmed: 16360687
doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2005.10.072
Lanfranco, R. C., Stein, T., Rabagliati, H. & Carmel, D. Gaze direction and face orientation modulate perceptual sensitivity to faces under interocular suppression. Sci. Rep. 12, 7640 (2022).
pubmed: 35538138
pmcid: 9090921
doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-11717-4
Stein, T. & Peelen, M. V. Dissociating conscious and unconscious influences on visual detection effects. Nat. Hum. Behav. 5, 612–624 (2021).
pubmed: 33398144
doi: 10.1038/s41562-020-01004-5
Stein, T., Senju, A., Peelen, M. V. & Sterzer, P. Eye contact facilitates awareness of faces during interocular suppression. Cognition 119, 307–311 (2011).
pubmed: 21316650
pmcid: 3796336
doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2011.01.008
Yang, E., Zald, D. H. & Blake, R. Fearful expressions gain preferential access to awareness during continuous flash suppression. Emotion 7, 882–886 (2007).
pubmed: 18039058
pmcid: 4038625
doi: 10.1037/1528-3542.7.4.882
Vetter, P., Badde, S., Phelps, E. A. & Carrasco, M. Emotional faces guide the eyes in the absence of awareness. eLife 8, e43467 (2019).
pubmed: 30735123
pmcid: 6382349
doi: 10.7554/eLife.43467
Hedger, N., Gray, K. L. H., Garner, M. & Adams, W. J. Are visual threats prioritized without awareness? a critical review and meta-analysis involving 3 behavioral paradigms and 2696 observers. Psychol. Bull. 142, 934–968 (2016).
pubmed: 27123863
doi: 10.1037/bul0000054
Lanfranco, R. C., Rabagliati, H. & Carmel, D. The importance of awareness in face processing: a critical review of interocular suppression studies. Behav. Brain Res. 437, 114116 (2023).
pubmed: 36113728
doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2022.114116
Lanfranco, R. C., Rabagliati, H. & Carmel, D. Assessing the influence of emotional expressions on perceptual sensitivity to faces overcoming interocular suppression. Emotion 23, 2059–2079 (2023).
pubmed: 36877488
doi: 10.1037/emo0001215
Gray, K. L. H., Adams, W. J., Hedger, N., Newton, K. E. & Garner, M. Faces and awareness: low-level, not emotional factors determine perceptual dominance. Emotion 13, 537–544 (2013).
pubmed: 23398580
doi: 10.1037/a0031403
McKelvie, S. J. Emotional expression in upside-down faces: evidence for configurational and componential processing. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 34, 325–334 (1995).
pubmed: 7551775
doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8309.1995.tb01067.x
Maniscalco, B. & Lau, H. A signal detection theoretic approach for estimating metacognitive sensitivity from confidence ratings. Conscious. Cogn. 21, 422–430 (2012).
pubmed: 22071269
doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2011.09.021
Fleming, S. M. & Lau, H. C. How to measure metacognition. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 8, (2014).
Baden, T., Euler, T. & Berens, P. Understanding the retinal basis of vision across species. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 21, 5–20 (2020).
pubmed: 31780820
doi: 10.1038/s41583-019-0242-1
Bradley, M. M., Hamby, S., Löw, A. & Lang, P. J. Brain potentials in perception: picture complexity and emotional arousal. Psychophysiology 44, 364–373 (2007).
pubmed: 17433095
doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00520.x
Hajcak, G., MacNamara, A. & Olvet, D. M. Event-related potentials, emotion, and emotion regulation: an integrative review. Dev. Neuropsychol. 35, 129–155 (2010).
pubmed: 20390599
doi: 10.1080/87565640903526504
Grootswagers, T., Wardle, S. G. & Carlson, T. A. Decoding dynamic brain patterns from evoked responses: a tutorial on multivariate pattern analysis applied to time series neuroimaging data. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 29, 677–697 (2017).
pubmed: 27779910
doi: 10.1162/jocn_a_01068
Koivisto, M. & Grassini, S. Neural processing around 200ms after stimulus-onset correlates with subjective visual awareness. Neuropsychologia 84, 235–243 (2016).
pubmed: 26944872
doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2016.02.024
Del Cul, A., Baillet, S. & Dehaene, S. Brain dynamics underlying the nonlinear threshold for access to consciousness. PLOS Biol. 5, e260 (2007).
pubmed: 17896866
pmcid: 1988856
doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0050260
Sergent, C., Baillet, S. & Dehaene, S. Timing of the brain events underlying access to consciousness during the attentional blink. Nat. Neurosci. 8, 1391–1400 (2005).
pubmed: 16158062
doi: 10.1038/nn1549
Carmel, D. & Bentin, S. Domain specificity versus expertise: factors influencing distinct processing of faces. Cognition 83, 1–29 (2002).
pubmed: 11814484
doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(01)00162-7
Grill-Spector, K. & Kanwisher, N. Visual recognition: as soon as you know it is there, you know what it is. Psychol. Sci. 16, 152–160 (2005).
pubmed: 15686582
doi: 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.00796.x
Almeida, J., Pajtas, P. E., Mahon, B. Z., Nakayama, K. & Caramazza, A. Affect of the unconscious: visually suppressed angry faces modulate our decisions. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 13, 94–101 (2013).
pubmed: 23224765
pmcid: 4752568
doi: 10.3758/s13415-012-0133-7
Esteves, F. & Öhman, A. Masking the face: recognition of emotional facial expressions as a function of the parameters of backward masking. Scand. J. Psychol. 34, 1–18 (1993).
pubmed: 8322040
doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9450.1993.tb01096.x
Morris, J. S., Öhman, A. & Dolan, R. J. Conscious and unconscious emotional learning in the human amygdala. Nature 393, 467–470 (1998).
pubmed: 9624001
doi: 10.1038/30976
Kiss, M. & Eimer, M. ERPs reveal subliminal processing of fearful faces. Psychophysiology 45, 318–326 (2008).
pubmed: 17995905
doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00634.x
Whalen, P. J. et al. Masked presentations of emotional facial expressions modulate amygdala activity without explicit knowledge. J. Neurosci. 18, 411–418 (1998).
pubmed: 9412517
pmcid: 6793390
doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.18-01-00411.1998
Gilbert, C. D. & Li, W. Top-down influences on visual processing. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 14, 350–363 (2013).
pubmed: 23595013
doi: 10.1038/nrn3476
Grill-Spector, K. & Malach, R. The human visual cortex. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 27, 649–677 (2004).
pubmed: 15217346
doi: 10.1146/annurev.neuro.27.070203.144220
Beauny, A. et al. Unconscious categorization of sub-millisecond complex images. PLOS ONE 15, e0236467 (2020).
pubmed: 32785238
pmcid: 7423101
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0236467
Macmillan, N. A. & Creelman, C. D. Detection Theory. (Routledge, 2004).
Maniscalco, B. & Lau, H. Signal detection theory analysis of type 1 and type 2 data: Meta-d’, response-specific meta-d’, and the unequal variance SDT model. The cognitive neuroscience of metacognition (eds. Fleming, S. M. & Frith, C. D.), 25–66 (Springer, 2014).
Maniscalco, B. & Lau, H. The signal processing architecture underlying subjective reports of sensory awareness. Neurosci. Conscious. 2016, niw002 (2016).
Hajcak, G., Weinberg, A., MacNamara, A. & Foti, D. et al. ERPs and the Study of Emotion. The Oxford Handbook of Event-Related Potential Components (eds. Luck, S. J. & Kappenman, E. S.), 442-472 (Oxford University Press, 2011).
Luck, S. J. An Introduction to the Event-Related Potential Technique. (MIT Press, 2014).
Luck, S. J. & Gaspelin, N. How to get statistically significant effects in any ERP experiment (and why you shouldn’t). Psychophysiology 54, 146–157 (2017).
pubmed: 28000253
pmcid: 5178877
doi: 10.1111/psyp.12639
Tadel, F., Baillet, S., Mosher, J. C., Pantazis, D. & Leahy, R. M. Brainstorm: a user-friendly application for MEG/EEG analysis. Comput. Intel. Neurosci. (2011).
Gramfort, A., Papadopoulo, T., Olivi, E. & Clerc, M. OpenMEEG: opensource software for quasistatic bioelectromagnetics. BioMed. Eng. Online 9, 45 (2010).
pubmed: 20819204
pmcid: 2949879
doi: 10.1186/1475-925X-9-45
Baillet, S., Mosher, J. C. & Leahy, R. M. Electromagnetic brain mapping. IEEE Signal Process. Mag. 18, 14–30 (2001).
doi: 10.1109/79.962275
Fahrenfort, J. J., van Driel, J., van Gaal, S. & Olivers, C. N. L. From ERPs to MVPA using the Amsterdam decoding and modeling toolbox (ADAM). Front. Neurosci. 12, 368 (2018).
Xue, J. & Hall, P. Why does rebalancing class-unbalanced data improve auc for linear discriminant analysis? IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intel. 37, 1109–1112 (2015).
doi: 10.1109/TPAMI.2014.2359660
Bradley, A. P. The use of the area under the ROC curve in the evaluation of machine learning algorithms. Pattern Recognit. 30, 1145–1159 (1997).
doi: 10.1016/S0031-3203(96)00142-2
Wickens, T. D. Elementary Signal Detection Theory. (Oxford University Press, 2001).
Maris, E. & Oostenveld, R. Nonparametric statistical testing of EEG- and MEG-data. J. Neurosci. Methods 164, 177–190 (2007).
pubmed: 17517438
doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2007.03.024
JASP Team. JASP. [Computer Software] (2020).