Pre-stimulus pattern of activity in the fusiform face area predicts face percepts during binocular rivalry.

Visual input is ambiguous, yet conscious experience is unambiguous. In binocular rivalry the two eyes receive conflicting images, but only one of them is consciously perceived at a time. Here we search for the neural sites of the competitive interactions underlying this phenomenon by testing whether neural pattern activity occurring before stimulus presentation can predict the initial dominant percept in binocular rivalry and, if so, where in the brain such predictive activity is found. Subjects were scanned while viewing an image of a face in one eye and an image of a house in the other eye with anaglyph glasses. The rivalrous stimulus was presented briefly for each trial, and the subject indicated which of the two images he or she preferentially perceived. Our results show that BOLD fMRI multivariate pattern activity in the fusiform face area (FFA) before the stimulus is presented predicts which of the two images will be dominant, suggesting that higher extrastriate areas, such as the FFA, are not only correlated with, but may also be involved in determining the initial dominant percept in binocular rivalry. Furthermore, by examining pattern activity before and after trial onset, we found that pre-trial activity in the FFA for the rivalrous face trials is no more similar to the post-trial activity for the non-rivalrous face trials than to that for the non-rivalrous house trials, indicating a dissociation between neural pattern information, which predicts a given state of awareness, and mean responses, which reflect the state of awareness ultimately achieved.

Attention response functions: characterizing brain areas using fMRI activation during parametric variations of attentional load.

We derived attention response functions for different cortical areas by plotting neural activity (measured by fMRI) as a function of attentional load in a visual tracking task. In many parietal and frontal cortical areas, activation increased with load over the entire range of loads tested, suggesting that these areas are directly involved in attentional processes. However, in other areas (FEF and parietal area 7), strong activation was observed even at the lowest attentional load (compared to a passive baseline using identical stimuli), but little or no additional activation was seen with increasing load. These latter areas appear to play a different role, perhaps supporting task-relevant functions that do not vary with load, such as the suppression of eye movements.

Neuroimaging of cognitive functions in human parietal cortex.

Functional neuroimaging has proven highly valuable in mapping human sensory regions, particularly visual areas in occipital cortex. Recent evidence suggests that human parietal cortex may also consist of numerous specialized subregions similar to those reported in neurophysiological studies of non-human primates. However, parietal activation generalizes across a wide variety of cognitive tasks and the extension of human brain mapping into higher-order "association cortex" may prove to be a challenge.

Cortical fMRI activation produced by attentive tracking of moving targets.

Attention can be used to keep track of moving items, particularly when there are multiple targets of interest that cannot all be followed with eye movements. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) was used to investigate cortical regions involved in attentive tracking. Cortical flattening techniques facilitated within-subject comparisons of activation produced by attentive tracking, visual motion, discrete attention shifts, and eye movements. In the main task, subjects viewed a display of nine green "bouncing balls" and used attention to mentally track a subset of them while fixating. At the start of each attentive-tracking condition, several target balls (e.g., 3/9) turned red for 2 s and then reverted to green. Subjects then used attention to keep track of the previously indicated targets, which were otherwise indistinguishable from the nontargets. Attentive-tracking conditions alternated with passive viewing of the same display when no targets had been indicated. Subjects were pretested with an eye-movement monitor to ensure they could perform the task accurately while fixating. For seven subjects, functional activation was superimposed on each individual's cortically unfolded surface. Comparisons between attentive tracking and passive viewing revealed bilateral activation in parietal cortex (intraparietal sulcus, postcentral sulcus, superior parietal lobule, and precuneus), frontal cortex (frontal eye fields and precentral sulcus), and the MT complex (including motion-selective areas MT and MST). Attentional enhancement was absent in early visual areas and weak in the MT complex. However, in parietal and frontal areas, the signal change produced by the moving stimuli was more than doubled when items were tracked attentively. Comparisons between attentive tracking and attention shifting revealed essentially identical activation patterns that differed only in the magnitude of activation. This suggests that parietal cortex is involved not only in discrete shifts of attention between objects at different spatial locations but also in continuous "attentional pursuit" of moving objects. Attentive-tracking activation patterns were also similar, though not identical, to those produced by eye movements. Taken together, these results suggest that attentive tracking is mediated by a network of areas that includes parietal and frontal regions responsible for attention shifts and eye movements and the MT complex, thought to be responsible for motion perception. These results are consistent with theoretical models of attentive tracking as an attentional process that assigns spatial tags to targets and registers changes in their position, generating a high-level percept of apparent motion.

Perceiving visually presented objects: recognition, awareness, and modularity.

Object perception may involve seeing, recognition, preparation of actions, and emotional responses--functions that human brain imaging and neuropsychology suggest are localized separately. Perhaps because of this specialization, object perception is remarkably rapid and efficient. Representations of componential structure and interpolation from view-dependent images both play a part in object recognition. Unattended objects may be implicitly registered, but recent experiments suggest that attention is required to bind features, to represent three-dimensional structure, and to mediate awareness.

Early brain potentials link repetition blindness, priming and novelty detection.

To study mechanisms of visual object identification in humans, event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded during successful or unsuccessful identification of rapid, serially presented words (unrepeated or repeated). We observed 'repetition blindness' (RB): more repeated than unrepeated words were incorrectly reported. ERPs from repetition-blinded words exhibited little or none of the enhanced positivity found for correctly reported repeated words, resembling instead ERPs from any unrepeated sequence initially, but only incorrectly reported unrepeated sequences later. Thus it appears that in RB an early (220 ms) neural operation that normally initiates facilitated processing from immediate repetition priming erroneously processes a repeated item as novel. This operation (possibly in basotemporal neocortex) appears to induce differential subsequent processing of novel vs repeated information.

Signal detection analyses of repetition blindness.

Three experiments used a signal detection model to demonstrate that repetition blindness (N. Kanwisher, 1987) reflects a reduction in sensitivity (d') for the detection of repeated compared with unrepeated visual targets. In experiment 1, repetition blindness (RB) was found for rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) letter sequences, whether the visual targets were specified by category membership (vowels) or as 1 of 2 prespecified letters (e.g., A or O). In Experiment 2, RB was found to a similar degree even when the Ist critical item was displayed for twice as long as the other list items, although overall performance was considerably improved. Experiment 3 found RB for displays containing just 2 simultaneously presented letters. These results support Kanwisher's (1987) account of RB as a genuine perceptual effect, and rule out alternative accounts of RB as the result of response bias, output interference, or guessing biases.

Repetition blindness: levels of processing.

Repetition blindness (RB) is the failure to detect or recall repetitions of words in rapid serial visual presentation. Experiment 1 showed that synonym pairs are not susceptible to RB. In Experiments 2 and 3, RB was still found when one occurrence of the word was part of a compound noun phrase. In Experiment 4, homonyms produced RB if they were spelled identically (even if pronounced differently) but not if spelled differently and pronounced the same. Similarly spelled but otherwise unrelated word pairs appeared to generate RB (Experiment 5), but Experiment 6 produced an alternative account. Experiments 7 and 8 demonstrated that repeated letters are susceptible to RB only when displayed individually, not as part of two otherwise different words. It is concluded that RB can occur at either an orthographic (possibly morphemic) level or a case-independent letter level, depending on which unit (words or single letters) is the focus of processing.