↓ Skip to main content

Masking reveals parallel form systems in the visual brain

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
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
Masking reveals parallel form systems in the visual brain
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, July 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00567
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yu Tung Lo, Semir Zeki

Abstract

It is generally supposed that there is a single, hierarchically organized pathway dedicated to form processing, in which complex forms are elaborated from simpler ones, beginning with the orientation-selective cells of V1. In this psychophysical study, we undertook to test another hypothesis, namely that the brain's visual form system consists of multiple parallel systems and that complex forms are other than the sum of their parts. Inspired by imaging experiments which show that forms of increasing perceptual complexity (lines, angles, and rhombuses) constituted from the same elements (lines) activate the same visual areas (V1, V2, and V3) with the same intensity and latency (Shigihara and Zeki, 2013, 2014), we used backward masking to test the supposition that these forms are processed in parallel. We presented subjects with lines, angles, and rhombuses as different target-mask pairs. Evidence in favor of our supposition would be if masking is the most effective when target and mask are processed by the same system and least effective when they are processed in different systems. Our results showed that rhombuses were strongly masked by rhombuses but only weakly masked by lines or angles, but angles and lines were well masked by each other. The relative resistance of rhombuses to masking by low-level forms like lines and angles suggests that complex forms like rhombuses may be processed in a separate parallel system, whereas lines and angles are processed in the same one.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 9%
Spain 1 4%
United States 1 4%
Unknown 19 83%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 13%
Researcher 3 13%
Student > Postgraduate 3 13%
Student > Master 3 13%
Other 5 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 10 43%
Psychology 6 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 4%
Other 3 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 09 February 2016.
All research outputs
#7,134,223
of 22,758,963 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,053
of 7,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,357
of 228,769 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#125
of 254 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,758,963 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,138 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its peers.
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 228,769 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 254 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.