Feature expectation heightens visual sensitivity during fine orientation discrimination.

Attending to a stimulus enhances the sensitivity of perceptual decisions. However, it remains unclear how perceptual sensitivity varies according to whether a feature is expected or unexpected. Here, observers made fine discrimination judgments about the orientation of visual gratings embedded in low spatial-frequency noise, and psychophysical reverse correlation was used to estimate decision 'kernels' that revealed how visual features influenced choices. Orthogonal cues alerted subjects to which of two spatial locations was likely to be probed (spatial attention cue) and which of two oriented gratings was likely to occur (feature expectation cue). When an expected (relative to unexpected) feature occurred, decision kernels shifted away from the category boundary, allowing observers to capitalize on more informative, "off-channel" stimulus features. By contrast, the spatial attention cue had a multiplicative influence on decision kernels, consistent with an increase in response gain. Feature expectation thus heightens sensitivity to the most informative visual features, independent of selective attention.

[1]  Howard S. Bashinski,et al.  Enhancement of perceptual sensitivity as the result of selectively attending to spatial locations , 1980, Perception & psychophysics.

[2]  M. Posner,et al.  Attention and the detection of signals. , 1980, Journal of experimental psychology.

[3]  J. Movshon,et al.  A new perceptual illusion reveals mechanisms of sensory decoding , 2007, Nature.

[4]  L. Itti,et al.  Search Goal Tunes Visual Features Optimally , 2007, Neuron.

[5]  Samuel W Cheadle,et al.  Adaptive Gain Control during Human Perceptual Choice , 2014, Neuron.

[6]  Xiao-Jing Wang,et al.  Probabilistic Decision Making by Slow Reverberation in Cortical Circuits , 2002, Neuron.

[7]  Stephen Grossberg,et al.  Nonlinear neural networks: Principles, mechanisms, and architectures , 1988, Neural Networks.

[8]  C. Summerfield,et al.  Do humans make good decisions? , 2015, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[9]  H Stanislaw,et al.  Calculation of signal detection theory measures , 1999, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[10]  D. M. Green,et al.  Signal detection theory and psychophysics , 1966 .

[11]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Canonical Microcircuits for Predictive Coding , 2012, Neuron.

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

[13]  H. B. Barlow,et al.  Possible Principles Underlying the Transformations of Sensory Messages , 2012 .

[14]  J. Serences,et al.  Optimal Deployment of Attentional Gain during Fine Discriminations , 2012, The Journal of Neuroscience.

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

[16]  Carrie J. McAdams,et al.  Effects of Attention on Orientation-Tuning Functions of Single Neurons in Macaque Cortical Area V4 , 1999, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[17]  Christopher Summerfield,et al.  Adaptive gain control during human perceptual choice , 2014 .

[18]  M. Carrasco.  Visual attention: The past 25 years , 2011, Vision Research.

[19]  Christopher Summerfield,et al.  Dissociable prior influences of signal probability and relevance on visual contrast sensitivity , 2011 .

[20]  A. Ahumada.  Perceptual Classification Images from Vernier Acuity Masked by Noise , 1996 .

[21]  H. Lau,et al.  Attention induces conservative subjective biases in visual perception , 2011, Nature Neuroscience.

[22]  Eero P. Simoncelli.  Vision and the statistics of the visual environment , 2003, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[23]  Scott D. Brown,et al.  Perceptual consequences of feature-based attentional enhancement and suppression. , 2012, Journal of vision.

[24]  James L. McClelland,et al.  The time course of perceptual choice: the leaky, competing accumulator model. , 2001, Psychological review.

[25]  G. Boynton,et al.  Global effects of feature-based attention in human visual cortex , 2002, Nature Neuroscience.

[26]  C. Summerfield,et al.  Robust averaging during perceptual judgment , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[27]  Christopher Summerfield,et al.  Unreliable Evidence: 2 Sources of Uncertainty During Perceptual Choice , 2013, Cerebral cortex.

[28]  S. Treue,et al.  Feature-Based Attention Increases the Selectivity of Population Responses in Primate Visual Cortex , 2004, Current Biology.

[29]  S Ullman,et al.  Sequence seeking and counter streams: a computational model for bidirectional information flow in the visual cortex. , 1995, Cerebral cortex.

[30]  Joshua A Solomon,et al.  Noise reveals visual mechanisms of detection and discrimination. , 2002, Journal of vision.

[31]  Matthew F. Peterson,et al.  Statistical decision theory to relate neurons to behavior in the study of covert visual attention , 2009, Vision Research.

[32]  D. Levi,et al.  Receptive versus perceptive fields from the reverse-correlation viewpoint , 2006, Vision Research.

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

[34]  J. Serences,et al.  Adaptive Allocation of Attentional Gain , 2009, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[35]  J Wolfowitz,et al.  Bayes Solutions of Sequential Decision Problems. , 1949, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.