Evaluating Population Receptive Field Estimation Frameworks in Terms of Robustness and Reproducibility

Within vision research retinotopic mapping and the more general receptive field estimation approach constitute not only an active field of research in itself but also underlie a plethora of interesting applications. This necessitates not only good estimation of population receptive fields (pRFs) but also that these receptive fields are consistent across time rather than dynamically changing. It is therefore of interest to maximize the accuracy with which population receptive fields can be estimated in a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) setting. This, in turn, requires an adequate estimation framework providing the data for population receptive field mapping. More specifically, adequate decisions with regard to stimulus choice and mode of presentation need to be made. Additionally, it needs to be evaluated whether the stimulation protocol should entail mean luminance periods and whether it is advantageous to average the blood oxygenation level dependent (BOLD) signal across stimulus cycles or not. By systematically studying the effects of these decisions on pRF estimates in an empirical as well as simulation setting we come to the conclusion that a bar stimulus presented at random positions and interspersed with mean luminance periods is generally most favorable. Finally, using this optimal estimation framework we furthermore tested the assumption of temporal consistency of population receptive fields. We show that the estimation of pRFs from two temporally separated sessions leads to highly similar pRF parameters.

[1]  Xiao-Hua Zhou,et al.  Statistical Methods for Meta‐Analysis , 2008 .

[2]  T. Tideman,et al.  Independence of clones as a criterion for voting rules , 1987 .

[3]  J W Belliveau,et al.  Borders of multiple visual areas in humans revealed by functional magnetic resonance imaging. , 1995, Science.

[4]  N. Fisher,et al.  A correlation coefficient for circular data , 1983 .

[5]  B. Wandell,et al.  Compressive spatial summation in human visual cortex. , 2013, Journal of neurophysiology.

[6]  Ione Fine,et al.  Minimizing biases in estimating the reorganization of human visual areas with BOLD retinotopic mapping. , 2013, Journal of vision.

[7]  Alexander M. Puckett,et al.  Population Attentional Field Modeling , 2013 .

[8]  Rainer Goebel,et al.  Optimizing Functional Accuracy of TMS in Cognitive Studies: A Comparison of Methods , 2009, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[9]  Koen V. Haak,et al.  Abnormal visual field maps in human cortex: A mini-review and a case report , 2014, Cortex.

[10]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  Metamers of the ventral stream , 2011, Nature Neuroscience.

[11]  Wim Vanduffel,et al.  The Radial Bias: A Different Slant on Visual Orientation Sensitivity in Human and Nonhuman Primates , 2006, Neuron.

[12]  Martijn Barendregt,et al.  Contour extracting networks in early extrastriate cortex. , 2014, Journal of vision.

[13]  E. DeYoe,et al.  Mapping striate and extrastriate visual areas in human cerebral cortex. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[14]  L. Hedges,et al.  Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis , 1987 .

[15]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  Automatic volumetric segmentation of human visual retinotopic cortex , 2003, NeuroImage.

[16]  Rainer Goebel,et al.  Modeling invariant object processing based on tight integration of simulated and empirical data in a Common Brain Space , 2012, Front. Comput. Neurosci..

[17]  Brian A. Wandell,et al.  Population receptive field estimates in human visual cortex , 2008, NeuroImage.

[18]  Daniel D. Dilks,et al.  Reorganization of Visual Processing in Macular Degeneration Is Not Specific to the “Preferred Retinal Locus” , 2009, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[19]  Nikos K. Logothetis,et al.  A new method for estimating population receptive field topography in visual cortex , 2013, NeuroImage.

[20]  J. H. Steiger,et al.  Beyond the F test: Effect size confidence intervals and tests of close fit in the analysis of variance and contrast analysis. , 2004, Psychological methods.

[21]  Jean-Baptiste Poline,et al.  Inverse retinotopy: Inferring the visual content of images from brain activation patterns , 2006, NeuroImage.