Speed of Human Biological Form and Motion Processing

Recent work suggests that biological motion processing can begin within ~110 ms of stimulus onset, as indexed by the P1 component of the event-related potential (ERP). Here, we investigated whether modulation of the P1 component reflects configural processing alone, rather than the processing of both configuration and motion cues. A three-stimulus oddball task was employed to evaluate bottom-up processing of biological motion. Intact point-light walkers (PLWs) or scrambled PLWs served as distractor stimuli, whereas point-light displays of tool motion served as standard and target stimuli. In a second experiment, the same design was used, but the dynamic stimuli were replaced with static point-light displays. The first experiment revealed that dynamic PLWs elicited a larger P1 as compared to scrambled PLWs. A similar P1 increase was also observed for static PLWs in the second experiment, indicating that these stimuli were more salient than static, scrambled PLWs. These findings suggest that the visual system can rapidly extract global form information from static PLWs and that the observed P1 effect for dynamic PLWs is not dependent on the presence of motion cues. Finally, we found that the N1 component was sensitive to dynamic, but not static, PLWs, suggesting that this component reflects the processing of both form and motion information. The sensitivity of P1 to static PLWs has implications for dynamic form models of biological motion processing that posit temporal integration of configural cues present in individual frames of PLW animations.

[1]  T. Poggio,et al.  Cognitive neuroscience: Neural mechanisms for the recognition of biological movements , 2003, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[2]  K. Hiraki,et al.  The relative importance of spatial versus temporal structure in the perception of biological motion: An event-related potential study , 2006, Cognition.

[3]  S. Hillyard,et al.  Event-related brain potentials in the study of visual selective attention. , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[4]  Matthias Dümpelmann,et al.  The effect of face inversion on intracranial and scalp recordings of event-related potentials. , 2010, Psychophysiology.

[5]  Q. Vuong,et al.  Incidental Processing of Biological Motion , 2004, Current Biology.

[6]  E. Amenedo,et al.  MMN in the visual modality: a review , 2003, Biological Psychology.

[7]  Nikolaus F. Troje,et al.  Structural encoding and recognition of biological motion: evidence from event-related potentials and source analysis , 2005, Behavioural Brain Research.

[8]  Daniel M. Roberts,et al.  Contextual task difficulty modulates stimulus discrimination: electrophysiological evidence for interaction between sensory and executive processes. , 2012, Psychophysiology.

[9]  G. Johansson Visual perception of biological motion and a model for its analysis , 1973 .

[10]  Brian A. Lopez,et al.  P3a from visual stimuli: task difficulty effects. , 2006, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[11]  Raja Parasuraman,et al.  Attention, biological motion, and action recognition , 2012, NeuroImage.

[12]  Pejman Sehatpour,et al.  The neurophysiology of human biological motion processing: A high-density electrical mapping study , 2011, NeuroImage.

[13]  S. Hillyard,et al.  Modulations of sensory-evoked brain potentials indicate changes in perceptual processing during visual-spatial priming. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[14]  J A Beintema,et al.  Perception of biological motion without local image motion , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[15]  S. Luck,et al.  Feature-based attention modulates feedforward visual processing , 2009, Nature Neuroscience.

[16]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Intact “biological motion” and “structure from motion” perception in a patient with impaired motion mechanisms: A case study , 1990, Visual Neuroscience.

[17]  Roberto Cipolla,et al.  Structure from motion , 2008 .

[18]  N. Birbaumer,et al.  Dissociable cortical processing of recognizable and non-recognizable biological movement: analysing gamma MEG activity. , 2004, Cerebral cortex.

[19]  Raja Parasuraman,et al.  Object-Based Attentional Modulation of Biological Motion Processing: Spatiotemporal Dynamics Using Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Electroencephalography , 2010, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[20]  E. Vogel,et al.  Sensory gain control (amplification) as a mechanism of selective attention: electrophysiological and neuroimaging evidence. , 1998, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[21]  Phillip J. Holcomb,et al.  To Ignore or Explore: Top-Down Modulation of Novelty Processing , 2008, J. Cogn. Neurosci..

[22]  D. Friedman,et al.  The novelty P3: an event-related brain potential (ERP) sign of the brain's evaluation of novelty , 2001, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[23]  P. Schyns,et al.  Visual Object Categorization in the Brain: What Can We Really Learn from ERP Peaks? , 2011, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[24]  Arnaud Delorme,et al.  EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis , 2004, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[25]  Wendy Baccus,et al.  Early integration of form and motion in the neural response to biological motion , 2009, Neuroreport.

[26]  J. Polich,et al.  P3a and P3b from typical auditory and visual stimuli , 1999, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[27]  Marina Pavlova,et al.  Attentional modulation of cortical neuromagnetic gamma response to biological movement. , 2006, Cerebral cortex.

[28]  P. McLeod,et al.  Preserved and Impaired Detection of Structure From Motion by a 'Motion-blind" Patient , 1996 .

[29]  J. Lange,et al.  A Model of Biological Motion Perception from Configural Form Cues , 2006, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[30]  Todd C. Handy,et al.  Attention and Sensory Gain Control: A Peripheral Visual Process? , 2005, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[31]  R. Blake,et al.  Perception of human motion. , 2007, Annual review of psychology.

[32]  Kazuo Hiraki,et al.  An event-related potentials study of biological motion perception in humans , 2003, Neuroscience Letters.

[33]  Guillaume Thierry,et al.  Face-Sensitive Processes One Hundred Milliseconds after Picture Onset , 2011, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[34]  S. Hillyard,et al.  Modulations of sensory-evoked brain potentials indicate changes in perceptual processing during visual-spatial priming. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.