↓ Skip to main content

Opposing Dorsal/Ventral Stream Dynamics during Figure-ground Segregation

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Opposing Dorsal/Ventral Stream Dynamics during Figure-ground Segregation
Published in
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, February 2014
DOI 10.1162/jocn_a_00497
Pubmed ID
Authors

Martijn E. Wokke, H. Steven Scholte, Victor A. F. Lamme

Abstract

The visual system has been commonly subdivided into two segregated visual processing streams: The dorsal pathway processes mainly spatial information, and the ventral pathway specializes in object perception. Recent findings, however, indicate that different forms of interaction (cross-talk) exist between the dorsal and the ventral stream. Here, we used TMS and concurrent EEG recordings to explore these interactions between the dorsal and ventral stream during figure-ground segregation. In two separate experiments, we used repetitive TMS and single-pulse TMS to disrupt processing in the dorsal (V5/HMT⁺) and the ventral (lateral occipital area) stream during a motion-defined figure discrimination task. We presented stimuli that made it possible to differentiate between relatively low-level (figure boundary detection) from higher-level (surface segregation) processing steps during figure-ground segregation. Results show that disruption of V5/HMT⁺ impaired performance related to surface segregation; this effect was mainly found when V5/HMT⁺ was perturbed in an early time window (100 msec) after stimulus presentation. Surprisingly, disruption of the lateral occipital area resulted in increased performance scores and enhanced neural correlates of surface segregation. This facilitatory effect was also mainly found in an early time window (100 msec) after stimulus presentation. These results suggest a "push-pull" interaction in which dorsal and ventral extrastriate areas are being recruited or inhibited depending on stimulus category and task demands.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 3 5%
Japan 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 53 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 22%
Researcher 8 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 12%
Student > Master 7 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Other 15 25%
Unknown 4 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 22 37%
Neuroscience 12 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 17%
Engineering 3 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 5%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 4 7%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 October 2013.
All research outputs
#14,178,787
of 22,725,280 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
#1,490
of 2,165 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,889
of 307,196 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
#23
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,725,280 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,165 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.7. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 307,196 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.