It makes sense, so I see it better! Contextual information about the visual environment increases its perceived sharpness.

Predictive coding theories of visual perception postulate that expectations based on prior knowledge modulate the processing of information by sharpening the representation of expected features of a stimulus in visual cortex but few studies directly investigated whether expectations qualitatively affect perception. Our study investigated the influence of expectations based on prior experience and contextual information on the perceived sharpness of objects and scenes. In Experiments 1 and 2, we used a perceptual matching task. Participants saw two blurred images depicting the same object or scene and had to adjust the blur level of the right image to match the blur level of the left one. We manipulated the availability of relevant information to form expectations about the image's content: one of the two images contained predictable information while the other one unpredictable. At an equal level of blur, predictable objects and scenes were perceived as sharper than unpredictable ones. Experiment 3 involving explicit sharpness judgments confirmed these results. Our findings support the sharpening account of predictive coding theories by showing that expectations increase the perceived sharpness of the visual signal. Expectations about the visual environment help us understand it more easily, but also makes us perceive it better. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

[1]  Simon van Gaal,et al.  Subjective visibility report is facilitated by conscious predictions only , 2020, Consciousness and Cognition.

[2]  Christoph Teufel,et al.  Forms of prediction in the nervous system , 2020, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[3]  P. Kok,et al.  Prior Expectations of Motion Direction Modulate Early Sensory Processing , 2020, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[4]  Peter Hagoort,et al.  Word contexts enhance the neural representation of individual letters in early visual cortex , 2020, Nature Communications.

[5]  P. Kok,et al.  The Perceptual Prediction Paradox , 2019, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[6]  P. Downing,et al.  Causal Evidence for Expression of Perceptual Expectations in Category-Selective Extrastriate Regions , 2019, Current Biology.

[7]  M. Peterson,et al.  Prior Experience Alters the Appearance of Blurry Object Borders , 2019, Scientific Reports.

[8]  Radoslaw Martin Cichy,et al.  Object Vision in a Structured World , 2019, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[9]  N. Guyader,et al.  Influence of peripheral vision on object categorization in central vision. , 2019, Journal of vision.

[10]  Elena K. Festa,et al.  Age-related changes in the neural dynamics of bottom-up and top-down processing during visual object recognition: an electrophysiological investigation , 2019, Neurobiology of Aging.

[11]  Nuttida Rungratsameetaweemana,et al.  Dissociating the impact of attention and expectation on early sensory processing. , 2019, Current opinion in psychology.

[12]  F. D. de Lange,et al.  Action sharpens sensory representations of expected outcomes , 2018, Nature Communications.

[13]  F. D. Lange,et al.  How Do Expectations Shape Perception? , 2018, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[14]  P. Fletcher,et al.  Prior object-knowledge sharpens properties of early visual feature-detectors , 2018, Scientific Reports.

[15]  Nuttida Rungratsameetaweemana,et al.  Expectations Do Not Alter Early Sensory Processing during Perceptual Decision-Making , 2018, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[16]  Per B. Brockhoff,et al.  lmerTest Package: Tests in Linear Mixed Effects Models , 2017 .

[17]  Floris P. de Lange,et al.  Suppressed Sensory Response to Predictable Object Stimuli throughout the Ventral Visual Stream , 2017, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[18]  Dobromir Rahnev,et al.  Stimulus expectation alters decision criterion but not sensory signal in perceptual decision making , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[19]  Albert R. Powers,et al.  Pavlovian conditioning–induced hallucinations result from overweighting of perceptual priors , 2017, Science.

[20]  M. Peelen,et al.  Interaction between Scene and Object Processing Revealed by Human fMRI and MEG Decoding , 2017, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[21]  M. Bar,et al.  Associated Information Increases Subjective Perception of Duration , 2017, Perception.

[22]  Rufin Vogels,et al.  Encoding of Predictable and Unpredictable Stimuli by Inferior Temporal Cortical Neurons , 2017, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[23]  James M. Shine,et al.  Predictions penetrate perception: Converging insights from brain, behaviour and disorder , 2017, Consciousness and Cognition.

[24]  Michael W. Spratling A Hierarchical Predictive Coding Model of Object Recognition in Natural Images , 2016, Cognitive Computation.

[25]  Gary Lupyan,et al.  Objective Effects of Knowledge on Visual Perception , 2016, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[26]  R. Moran,et al.  Inputs to prefrontal cortex support visual recognition in the aging brain , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[27]  Biao Han,et al.  Shape perception enhances perceived contrast: evidence for excitatory predictive feedback? , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[28]  Christoph Teufel,et al.  Shift toward prior knowledge confers a perceptual advantage in early psychosis and psychosis-prone healthy individuals , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[29]  Marius V Peelen,et al.  Journal of Experimental Psychology : General Content-Specific Expectations Enhance Stimulus Detectability by Increasing Perceptual Sensitivity , 2015 .

[30]  Gary Lupyan,et al.  Object knowledge changes visual appearance: semantic effects on color afterimages. , 2015, Acta psychologica.

[31]  Tobias Egner,et al.  Feature expectation heightens visual sensitivity during fine orientation discrimination. , 2015, Journal of vision.

[32]  D. Bates,et al.  Parsimonious Mixed Models , 2015, 1506.04967.

[33]  Michelle R. Greene,et al.  What you see is what you expect: rapid scene understanding benefits from prior experience , 2015, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.

[34]  C. Summerfield,et al.  Expectation in perceptual decision making: neural and computational mechanisms , 2014, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[35]  R. Held,et al.  Autism as a disorder of prediction , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[36]  J. Wagemans,et al.  Precise minds in uncertain worlds: predictive coding in autism. , 2014, Psychological review.

[37]  D. Bates,et al.  Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4 , 2014, 1406.5823.

[38]  Louise Kauffmann,et al.  The neural bases of spatial frequency processing during scene perception , 2014, Front. Integr. Neurosci..

[39]  Raymond J. Dolan,et al.  The Brain Ages Optimally to Model Its Environment: Evidence from Sensory Learning over the Adult Lifespan , 2014, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[40]  Daniël Lakens,et al.  Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs , 2013, Front. Psychol..

[41]  B. Scholl,et al.  “Top-Down” Effects Where None Should Be Found , 2013, Psychological science.

[42]  Matthew H. Davis,et al.  Top-Down Influences of Written Text on Perceived Clarity of Degraded Speech , 2013, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[43]  A. Clark Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science. , 2013, The Behavioral and brain sciences.

[44]  D. Burr,et al.  When the world becomes ‘too real’: a Bayesian explanation of autistic perception , 2012, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[45]  Janneke F. M. Jehee,et al.  Less Is More: Expectation Sharpens Representations in the Primary Visual Cortex , 2012, Neuron.

[46]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  Treating stimuli as a random factor in social psychology: a new and comprehensive solution to a pervasive but largely ignored problem. , 2012, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[47]  Christopher Summerfield,et al.  Dissociable prior influences of signal probability and relevance on visual contrast sensitivity , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[48]  Derek H. Arnold,et al.  The oddball effect: perceived duration and predictive coding. , 2011, Journal of vision.

[49]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Attention, Uncertainty, and Free-Energy , 2010, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[50]  C. Summerfield,et al.  Expectation (and attention) in visual cognition , 2009, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[51]  Shinsuke Shimojo,et al.  Roles of familiarity and novelty in visual preference judgments are segregated across object categories , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[52]  Michelle R. Greene,et al.  Recognition of natural scenes from global properties: Seeing the forest without representing the trees , 2009, Cognitive Psychology.

[53]  Olivier R. Joubert,et al.  Early interference of context congruence on object processing in rapid visual categorization of natural scenes. , 2008, Journal of vision.

[54]  Karl R Gegenfurtner,et al.  Color appearance of familiar objects: effects of object shape, texture, and illumination changes. , 2008, Journal of vision.

[55]  Guillaume A. Rousselet,et al.  Processing scene context: Fast categorization and object interference , 2007, Vision Research.

[56]  A. Torralba,et al.  The role of context in object recognition , 2007, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[57]  D. Eagleman,et al.  The Effect of Predictability on Subjective Duration , 2007, PloS one.

[58]  M. Bar The proactive brain: using analogies and associations to generate predictions , 2007, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[59]  Jodi L. Davenport Consistency effects between objects in scenes , 2007, Memory & cognition.

[60]  K. Gegenfurtner,et al.  Memory modulates color appearance , 2006, Nature Neuroscience.

[61]  Simon J. Thorpe,et al.  Ultra-rapid object detection with saccadic eye movements: Visual processing speed revisited , 2006, Vision Research.

[62]  Olivier R. Joubert,et al.  How long to get to the “gist” of real-world natural scenes? , 2005 .

[63]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  A theory of cortical responses , 2005, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[64]  M. Bar Visual objects in context , 2004, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[65]  Jodi L. Davenport,et al.  Scene Consistency in Object and Background Perception , 2004, Psychological science.

[66]  Scott O. Murray,et al.  Perceptual grouping and the interactions between visual cortical areas , 2004, Neural Networks.

[67]  M. Carrasco,et al.  Attention alters appearance , 2004, Nature Neuroscience.

[68]  Antonio Torralba,et al.  Contextual Priming for Object Detection , 2003, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[69]  Tai Sing Lee,et al.  Hierarchical Bayesian inference in the visual cortex. , 2003, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[70]  Z. Pylyshyn Is vision continuous with cognition? The case for cognitive impenetrability of visual perception. , 1999, The Behavioral and brain sciences.

[71]  Marisa Carrasco,et al.  Attention improves or impairs visual performance by enhancing spatial resolution , 1998, Nature.

[72]  A. Oliva,et al.  From Blobs to Boundary Edges: Evidence for Time- and Spatial-Scale-Dependent Scene Recognition , 1994 .

[73]  Kevin J. Hawley,et al.  Attention capture by novel stimuli. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[74]  tephen E. Palmer The effects of contextual scenes on the identification of objects , 1975, Memory & cognition.

[75]  Floris P. de Lange,et al.  Predictive Coding in Sensory Cortex , 2015 .

[76]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[77]  Rajesh P. N. Rao,et al.  Predictive coding in the visual cortex: a functional interpretation of some extra-classical receptive-field effects. , 1999 .

[78]  D G Pelli,et al.  The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: transforming numbers into movies. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[79]  D H Brainard,et al.  The Psychophysics Toolbox. , 1997, Spatial vision.