On the use of metacontrast to assess magnocellular function in dyslexic readers

It has been proposed that dyslexia is the result of a deficit in the magnocellular system. Reduced metacontrast masking in dyslexic readers has been taken as support for this view. In metacontrast, a masking stimulus reduces the visibility of a spatially adjacent target stimulus when the target stimulus precedes the masking stimulus by about 30–100 msec. Recent evidence indicates that the latency difference between the magnocellular and parvocellular subcortical pathways is at most 20 msec and may be as small as only 5 msec, or even less. This makes it difficult to attribute the latency in metacontrast to the latency differences between the magnocellular and parvocellular systems. It is therefore problematic to attribute reduced metacontrast masking to a deficit in the magnocellular system.     

Attend to it now or lose it forever: selective attention,metacontrast masking,and object substitution

Metacontrast masking occurs when the visibility of a brief target stimulus is decreased by the subsequent appearance of another nearby visual stimulus. Early explanations of the phenomenon involved low-level mechanisms, but subsequent studies have suggested a role for selective attention. The results of three experiments presented here extend previous findings to the metacontrast paradigm. It is shown that the strength of metacontrast masking increases with the number of distractor items in a display, decreases when the target location is validly but not invalidly precued, and is eliminated when search for the target is efficient (pop-out search) but not when search is inefficient (serial search). A connection between metacontrast masking and object substitution masking is considered.     

The effect of a red background on location backward masking by structure

It has been established that diffuse red light partially suppresses the magnocellular (M) visual pathway. Previous research reported that metacontrast masking is reduced (improved accuracy) with a red background, consistent with a reduction in M pathway response from the mask. In contrast, a recent study used location backward masking by noise and found that accuracy decreased with a red background--theoretically due to suppression of the M pathway's initial localization of the target. The present study provides the first report examining the effect of red light on performance in a location backward masking by structure task. Results revealed a main effect of a red (as opposed to a green) background on reducing masking (improved accuracy) with a medium effect size (eta2 = .23). This effect was strongest at the 47- and 60-msec stimulus onset asynchronies. Results suggest that red light primarily decreases interference from the mask in location backward masking by structure.     

阅读障碍的巨细胞系统缺陷理论之争

近几年诸多研究者认为阅读障碍是由于视觉系统巨细胞功能缺陷引起的。他们从对比度敏感性研究、巨细胞抑制功能研究与视觉运动知觉功能的研究结果中得到了支持证据。就这个问题的研究进行综述,表明不论是巨细胞功能缺陷理论的支持者还是反对者,都从巨细胞的对比度敏感性、视觉运动知觉与巨细胞抑制功能上得到了一些研究结果的支持。巨细胞功能缺陷理论的支持者还从阅读障碍的神经生理学研究和阅读的脑功能研究中得到了一些支持性的证据。新的研究结果揭示了巨细胞系统缺陷理论与阅读之间的关系以及巨细胞系统缺陷理论的应用价值。在巨细胞系统缺陷理论的进一步研究中,还需要统一实验方法与实验标准以获得更多的证据,同时需要有新的方法来有效区分小细胞系统与巨细胞系统     

Decoupling stimulus duration from brightness in metacontrast masking: data and models

A brief target that is visible when displayed alone can be rendered invisible by a trailing stimulus (metacontrast masking). It has been difficult to determine the temporal dynamics of masking to date because increments in stimulus duration have been invariably confounded with apparent brightness (Bloch's law). In the research reported here, stimulus luminance was adjusted to maintain constant brightness across all durations. Increasing target duration yielded classical U-shaped masking functions, whereas increasing mask duration yielded monotonic decreasing functions. These results are compared with predictions from 6 theoretical models, with the lateral inhibition model providing the best overall fit. It is tentatively suggested that different underlying mechanisms may mediate the U-shaped and monotonic functions obtained with increasing durations of target and mask, respectively.     

Summation versus suppression in metacontrast masking: On the potential pitfalls of using metacontrast masking to assess perceptual–motor dissociation

A briefly flashed target stimulus can become “invisible” when immediately followed by a mask—a phenomenon known as backward masking, which constitutes a major tool in the cognitive sciences. One form of backward masking is termed metacontrast masking. It is generally assumed that in metacontrast masking, the mask suppresses activity on which the conscious perception of the target relies. This assumption biases conclusions when masking is used as a tool—for example, to study the independence between perceptual detection and motor reaction. This is because other models can account for reduced perceptual performance without requiring suppression mechanisms. In this study, we used signal detection theory to test the suppression model against an alternative view of metacontrast masking, referred to as the summation model. This model claims that target- and mask-related activations fuse and that the difficulty in detecting the target results from the difficulty to discriminate this fused response from the response produced by the mask alone. Our data support this alternative view. This study is not a thorough investigation of metacontrast masking. Instead, we wanted to point out that when a different model is used to account for the reduced perceptual performance in metacontrast masking, there is no need to postulate a dissociation between perceptual and motor responses to account for the data. Metacontrast masking, as implemented in the Fehrer–Raab situation, therefore is not a valid method to assess perceptual–motor dissociations.     

Metacontrast suppression and criterion content: A discriminant function analysis

Three test and three mask energies of a metacontrast display were varied orthogonally and randomly over trials. The stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) separating them was varied over blocks of trials from 0 to 180 msec in 30-msec steps. Both the accuracy in judging the test and the coherence (consistency) of the judgments were U-shaped functions of SOA. Thus, metacontrast suppression is in part due to inadequate information. In addition, mask energy was found to correlate negatively with judgments of the test at short SO As but positively at longer SOAs. This indicates that part of the masking effect is due to inappropriate use of information. Certain similarities were noted between these findings and those obtained with judgments of frequency in the auditory-recognition masking paradigm. In general, the results indicate that subjects respond to different features of the stimulus situation as SOA varies.     

Individually different weighting of multiple processes underlies effects of metacontrast masking

Metacontrast masking occurs when a mask follows a target stimulus in close spatial proximity. Target visibility varies with stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between target and mask in individually different ways leading to different masking functions with corresponding phenomenological reports. We used individual differences to determine the processes that underlie metacontrast masking. We assessed individual masking functions in a masked target discrimination task using different masking conditions and applied factor-analytical techniques on measures of sensitivity. Results yielded two latent variables that (1) contribute to performance with short and long SOA, respectively, (2) relate to specific stimulus features, and (3) differentially correlate with specific subjective percepts. We propose that each latent variable reflects a specific process. Two additional processes may contribute to performance with short and long SOAs, respectively. Discrimination performance in metacontrast masking results from individually different weightings of two to four processes, each of which contributes to specific subjective percepts.     

Interaction of stimulus size and retinal eccentricity in metacontrast masking

Metacontrast masking occurs both at the fovea and in the retinal periphery; foveally, the smallest stimulus elicited the strongest masking, whereas peripherally the reverse was the case. An analysis of variance showed a significant size effect, eccentricity effect, and size-eccentricity interaction. As stimulus size increased, the stimulus onset asynchrony of maximum masking shifted to greater values. Both foveal metacontrast and peak shifts contradicted predictions made by the hypothesis that metacontrast is mediated by an interaction of sustained and transient channels in the visual system. The data are consistent, however, with a lateral inhibitory model of metacontrast masking and stimulus coding.     

A tactile metacontrast effect

Vibrotactile patterns, generated on the 6×24 array of the Optacon, were presented to subjects’ left index fingertips. The subjects identified these patterns in the absence of any masking stimuli and in the presence of spatially adjacent masking stimuli. The amount of interference in recognizing the patterns was measured as a function of the interval between target and masker onsets. Masking functions similar to those reported in visual metacontrast studies were found; that is, more masking occurred when masker onset followed target onset by 25 to 50 msec than when onsets were simultaneous. Subjects showed more metacontrast when masker energy was reduced, a finding paralleled in the visual literature. The relevance of some models of visual metacontrast to the tactile findings is discussed.     

Individual differences in metacontrast masking are enhanced by perceptual learning

In vision research metacontrast masking is a widely used technique to reduce the visibility of a stimulus. Typically, studies attempt to reveal general principles that apply to a large majority of participants and tend to omit possible individual differences. The neural plasticity of the visual system, however, entails the potential capability for individual differences in the way observers perform perceptual tasks. We report a case of perceptual learning in a metacontrast masking task that leads to the enhancement of two types of adult human observers despite identical learning conditions. In a priming task both types of observers exhibited the same priming effects, which were insensitive to learning. Findings suggest that visual processing of target stimuli in the metacontrast masking task is based on neural levels with sufficient plasticity to enable the development of two types of observers, which do not contribute to processing of target stimuli in the priming task.     

Decrease in metacontrast masking following adaptation to flicker

Selective adaptation was used to explore the characterisitcs of a metacontrast masking stimulus which contribute to its effectiveness in masking the test stimulus. Subjects adapted for 10 s to a configuration like the masking stimulus that was either continuously on or flickering. Following this they viewed a metacontrast presentation and estimated the brightness of the test stimulus. Prior adaptation to a continuously present stimulus did not appreciably affect metacontrast masking; however, masking was greatly reduced following adaptation to flickering stimuli. These results are consistent with recent models of metacontrast masking based on transient and sustained visual channels.     

A Comparison of Two Lateral Inhibitory Models of Metacontrast

Metacontrast, an apparent reduction in brightness of a target that is followed by a non-overlapping mask, has been modeled with simulated neural nets incorporating either recurrent lateral inhibition or forward and backward inhibition with lateral components. A one-layer lateral inhibitory model (B. Bridgeman, 1971, Psychological Review 78, 528-539) and a six-layer model (G. Francis, 1997, Psychological Review 104, 572-594) both simulate the basic metacontrast effect, showing that stimulus-dependent activity that reverberates for some time in the model after stimulus offset is essential to simulate metacontrast. The six-layer model does not simulate monotonic masking with low response criterion, an essential property of metacontrast; the lateral inhibitory model uses duration of reverberation to simulate the criterion. Each model simulates several variations of masking, such as changing the relative energy of target and mask, but neither can handle effects of practice or attention that apparently engage higher processing levels. Copyright 2001 Academic Press.     

Target-mask shape congruence impacts the type of metacontrast masking

Visual metacontrast masking may depend on the time intervals between target and mask in two qualitatively different ways: in type-A masking the smaller the mask delay from target the stronger the masking while in type-B masking maximal masking effect is obtained with a larger temporal delay of the mask. Variability in the qualitative apperance of masking functions has been explained by variability in stimuli parameters and tasks. Recent research on metacontrast masking has surprisingly shown that both of these types of functions can be found with an identical range of stimulation parameters depending on individual differences between observers. Here we show that obtaining clear-cut type-A masking depends on whether target and mask shapes are congruent or incongruent and whether observers use the cues available due to the congruence factor. Conspicuously expressed type-A masking is selectively associated with incongruent target-mask pairings. In the latter conditions target identification level significantly drops with the shortest target-to-mask delays.     

Individual differences in metacontrast masking regarding sensitivity and response bias

In metacontrast masking target visibility is modulated by the time until a masking stimulus appears. The effect of this temporal delay differs across participants in such a way that individual human observers' performance shows distinguishable types of masking functions which remain largely unchanged for months. Here we examined whether individual differences in masking functions depend on different response criteria in addition to differences in discrimination sensitivity. To this end we reanalyzed previously published data and conducted a new experiment for further data analyses. Our analyses demonstrate that a distinction of masking functions based on the type of masking stimulus is superior to a distinction based on the target-mask congruency. Individually different masking functions are based on individual differences in discrimination sensitivities and in response criteria. Results suggest that individual differences in metacontrast masking result from individually different criterion contents.     

The influence of metacontrast masking on detection and spatial-choice judgments: an apparent distinction between automatic and attentive response mechanisms

Several studies of metacontrast masking in the 1960s apparently showed that the latency of simple detection responses was uninfluenced by the phenomenal dimming of the target induced by the mask. More recent studies using more suitable methodologies have clearly shown that such is not the case for situations in which the masking is a monotonically decreasing function of stimulus onset asynchrony. Experiment 1 investigated this issue for the situation in which masking is a U-shaped function of stimulus onset asynchrony. Contrary to the results obtained in monotonic masking situations, simple detection responses were not slowed by the masking. Experiment 2 demonstrated that although detection responses are not slowed in the U-shaped masking situation, spatial-choice judgments are. Experiments 3 and 4 indicated that this masking effect on spatial-choice reaction time is lost relatively rapidly with practice. However, changing the stimulus-response assignments reinstates the effect. The experiments suggest that for the situation in which U-shaped masking functions are obtained, responses that require attention (spatial-choice judgments early in practice or after stimulus-response relationships have been switched) are influenced by the metacontrast-induced phenomenal dimming, whereas responses that are automatic (i.e., detection responses; practiced spatial-choice judgments with consistent stimulus-response mappings) are not.     

Visual backward masking as measured by voice reaction time

Instead of using percent correct identifications or detections as the dependent variable, latency in voicing the target stimulus was measured in a backward masking paradigm. Reaction time (RT) to target letters was reliably increased when they were simultaneously encircled by a black ring mask of a size found to produce masking using an identification or detection criterion. The masking function in terms of RT was typical in shape, a decreasing function of stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) over an interval of 150 msec. Since the target remained “on” when the mask appeared, the results are incompatible with an erasure interpretation of masking effects. Analyses of the variances of the RTs supported an interpretation of a progressive decrease in masking effects as SOA increased.     

Metacontrast and brightness discrimination

An attempt was made to obtain U-shaped masking functions in two metacontrast experiments. Trained Ss judged whether a square test stimulus (TS) was bright or dim. The TS was presented alone or in conjunction with an adjacent pair of square masking stimuli (MS) whose energy equaled the bright TS. The stimulus onset asynchronies (SOA) rangedfrom 0 to 125 msec. The task minimized the role of apparent movement cues as a reliable basis for judgrnent. Similar studies have employed TS plus MS vs MS alone as the alternatives, allowing apparent movement to be a cue. Brightness accuracy was a U-shaped function of SOA. This finding is consistent with neural-net models (Weisstein, 1968). However, analysis of Ss’ response bias suggested an alternative explanation involving the MS as a comparison stimulus at short SOA. It was concluded that U-shaped masking functions are also consistent with theories based upon independent component processes, e.g., Schurman and Eriksen (1970) and Uttal (1970).     

Backward masking by pattern stimulus offset

The backward masking effects of the offset of a pattern stimulus on the apparent contrast of a target stimulus were determined to be a function of target onset-mask offset asynchrony. With spatially overlapping stimuli and binocular viewing, a monotonic function similar to that characterizing early dark adaptation was obtained; with a dichoptically presented disk onset as target and a surrounding ring offset as mask, a typical U-shaped metacontrast effect as a function of target onset-mask offset asynchrony was obtained. These mask-offset effects are related to the possible roles of (a) peripheral "off" mechanisms and (b) central metacontrast mechanisms in terminating visual response persistence in sustained channels.     

Disappearing Percepts: Evidence for Retention Failure in Metacontrast Masking

Results from a number of paradigms (including change blindness, inattentional blindness, integration over saccades, and backward masking) suggest that most of the visual information we take in is not retained, even for very short periods of time. This has led some to question whether such information is ever really perceived. We examine this issue using a variant of the classic metacontrast stimulus. When a briefly presented disk is followed by a briefly presented ring, observers may report not seeing the disk. Rather they report seeing the ring flicker as if the change in form from disk to ring is not recorded. This effect is highly dependent on the interval between the onset of the disk and the onset of the ring (the “stimulus onset asynchrony” or SOA). The maximum effect is usually found at a critical SOA of about 50 msec. Here we show that the ability of observers to distinguish such a disk/ring pair from a flickering ring is dependent also on how soon after the stimulus they respond. Early responses show a much smaller masking effect than late responses: Near the critical SOA accuracy improves when the observer responds more quickly (the opposite of the standard speed-accuracy trade-off), although at longer and shorter SOAs observers are less accurate on these early responses (a typical speed-accuracy trade-off). We interpret this finding as demonstrating that, at least in the case of metacontrast, retention of form information is disrupted, rather than initial access.