Separate neural subsystems support goal-directed speech listening.

How do humans excel at tracking the narrative of a particular speaker with a distracting noisy background? This feat places great demands on the collaboration between speech processing and goal-related regulatory functions. Here, we propose that separate subsystems with different cross-task dynamic activity properties and distinct functional purposes support goal-directed speech listening. We adopted a naturalistic dichotic speech listening paradigm in which listeners were instructed to attend to only one narrative from two competing inputs. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging with inter- and intra-subject correlation techniques, we discovered a dissociation in response consistency in temporal, parietal and frontal brain areas as the task demand varied. Specifically, some areas in the bilateral temporal cortex (SomMotB_Aud and TempPar) and lateral prefrontal cortex (DefaultB_PFCl and ContA_PFCl) always showed consistent activation across subjects and across scan runs, regardless of the task demand. In contrast, some areas in the parietal cortex (DefaultA_pCunPCC and ContC_pCun) responded reliably only when the task goal remained the same. These results suggested two dissociated functional neural networks that were independently validated by performing a data-driven clustering analysis of voxelwise functional connectivity patterns. A subsequent meta-analysis revealed distinct functional profiles for these two brain correlation maps. The different-task correlation map was strongly associated with language-related processes (e.g., listening, speech and sentences), whereas the same-task versus different-task correlation map was linked to self-referencing functions (e.g., default mode, theory of mind and autobiographical topics). Altogether, the three-pronged findings revealed two anatomically and functionally dissociated subsystems supporting goal-directed speech listening.

Twofold advantages of face processing with or without visual awareness.

The advantages of face processing over processing items in other object categories have been found in conditions both with and without visual awareness. This study examined the possible mechanisms underlying the advantages of processing visible and invisible faces. Specifically, contributions from face-like configurations and face-specific local attributes were evaluated by comparing perceptual processes of three image types: genuine faces, face-like objects, and non-face-like objects. Illusory face perception induced from face-like objects largely depended on information from a global configuration level, with a high tolerance for variations in local features. Comparable processing advantages for real faces and face-like objects were observed in invisible conditions using interocular rivalry and crowding paradigms. However, the visible face advantage seemed to be exclusive to genuine faces. These results suggest that the face processing privilege is twofold: It is strongly triggered by global configuration without visual awareness, but with awareness, it relies on facial local attributes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Attentional effect on contrast appearance: From enhancement to attenuation.

Does attention alter appearance? Recent studies have shown that an exogenous cue tends to increase the perceived contrast of a low-contrast stimulus. In the present study we systematically studied the attentional effect over a wide range of contrast levels (15% to 60%). Besides replicating the enhancement at lower contrast levels with higher comparative tasks (Experiment 1), the data revealed a cue-induced attenuation in apparent contrast at higher contrast levels with lower comparative tasks (Experiment 2) and same/different judgment task (Experiment 3). This attenuation effect was robust at the individual level, and it was not due to response bias or sensory interactions (Experiments 3 and 4). These results suggest that attention modulates contrast appearance and this effect depends on both the contrast level and the type of judgment task used. We propose that our findings can be understood through contrast gain mechanism on supersatuating neurons, whose response increases first as the stimulus intensity increases, but decrease the responses after the peak. This surprising phenomenon offers insights for the underlying neural mechanisms of visual processing. (PsycINFO Database Record