Novel procedure for generating continuous flash suppression: Seurat meets Mondrian.

Continuous flash suppression (CFS) entails presentation of a stationary target to one eye and an animated sequence of arrays of geometric figures, the mask, to the other eye. The prototypical CFS sequence comprises different sized rectangles of various colors, dubbed Mondrians. Presented as a rapid, changing sequence to one eye, Mondrians or other similarly constructed textured arrays can abolish awareness of the target viewed by the other eye for many seconds at a time, producing target suppression durations much longer than those associated with conventional binocular rivalry. We have devised an animation technique that replaces meaningless Mondrian figures with recognizable visual objects and scenes as inducers of CFS, allowing explicit manipulation of the visual semantic content of those masks. By converting each image of these CFS sequences into successively presented objects or scenes each comprised of many small, circular patches of color, we create pointillist CFS sequences closely matched in terms of their spatio-temporal power spectra. Randomly rearranging the positions of the pointillist patches scrambles the images so they are no longer recognizable. CFS sequences comprising a stream of different objects produces more robust interocular suppression than do sequences comprising a stream of different scenes, even when the two categories of CFS are matched in root mean square contrast and spatial frequency content. Factors promoting these differences in CFS potency could range from low-level, image-based features to high-level factors including attention and recognizability. At the same time, object- and scene-based CFS sequences, when themselves suppressed from awareness, do not differ in their durations of suppression, implying that semantic content of those images comprising CFS sequences are not registered during suppression. The pointillist technique itself offers a potentially useful means for examining the impact of high-level image meaning on aspects of visual perception other than interocular suppression.

[1]  Matthias Bethge,et al.  Approximating CNNs with Bag-of-local-Features models works surprisingly well on ImageNet , 2019, ICLR.

[2]  Guido Hesselmann,et al.  Weighing the evidence for a dorsal processing bias under continuous flash suppression , 2015, Consciousness and Cognition.

[3]  Kazuyuki Shinohara,et al.  Emotional faces influence numerosity estimation without awareness , 2016, Cognitive Processing.

[4]  Marius V. Peelen,et al.  Privileged detection of conspecifics: Evidence from inversion effects during continuous flash suppression , 2012, Cognition.

[5]  Derek H. Arnold,et al.  Learning to reach for ‘invisible’ visual input , 2011, Current Biology.

[6]  R. Blake,et al.  On the use of continuous flash suppression for the study of visual processing outside of awareness , 2014, Front. Psychol..

[7]  Bradford Z. Mahon,et al.  The Role of the Dorsal Visual Processing Stream in Tool Identification , 2010, Psychological science.

[8]  D. Alais,et al.  The temporal frequency tuning of continuous flash suppression reveals peak suppression at very low frequencies , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[9]  P. Sterzer,et al.  High-level face shape adaptation depends on visual awareness: evidence from continuous flash suppression. , 2011, Journal of vision.

[10]  Felix D. Schönbrodt,et al.  Sequential Hypothesis Testing With Bayes Factors: Efficiently Testing Mean Differences , 2017, Psychological methods.

[11]  J. Wagemans,et al.  Continuous Flash Suppression: Stimulus Fractionation rather than Integration , 2017, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[12]  W. Levelt,et al.  The ‘laws’ of binocular rivalry: 50 years of Levelt’s propositions , 2015, Vision Research.

[13]  Frédéric Gosselin,et al.  Bubbles: a technique to reveal the use of information in recognition tasks , 2001, Vision Research.

[14]  Nikolaus Kriegeskorte,et al.  Deep Supervised, but Not Unsupervised, Models May Explain IT Cortical Representation , 2014, PLoS Comput. Biol..

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

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

[17]  R. Blake,et al.  Fearful expressions gain preferential access to awareness during continuous flash suppression. , 2007, Emotion.

[18]  M. Rothkirch,et al.  No evidence for dorsal-stream-based priming under continuous flash suppression , 2018, Consciousness and Cognition.

[19]  V. Franz,et al.  Learning to detect but not to grasp suppressed visual stimuli , 2013, Neuropsychologia.

[20]  Jukka Häkkinen,et al.  CFS MATLAB toolbox: An experiment builder for continuous flash suppression (CFS) task , 2017, Behavior Research Methods.

[21]  Daniel D. Dilks,et al.  The occipital place area represents the local elements of scenes , 2016, NeuroImage.

[22]  Antonio Torralba,et al.  Modeling the Shape of the Scene: A Holistic Representation of the Spatial Envelope , 2001, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[23]  Do P. M. Tromp,et al.  Awareness of Emotional Stimuli Determines the Behavioral Consequences of Amygdala Activation and Amygdala-Prefrontal Connectivity , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[24]  Dominique Lamy,et al.  Integration Without Awareness , 2011, Psychological science.

[25]  Dwight J. Kravitz,et al.  Deconstructing visual scenes in cortex: gradients of object and spatial layout information. , 2013, Cerebral cortex.

[26]  Philipp Sterzer,et al.  Neural processing of visual information under interocular suppression: a critical review , 2014, Front. Psychol..

[27]  Timothy F. Brady,et al.  Conceptual Distinctiveness Supports Detailed Visual Long-term Memory for Real-world Objects the Fidelity of Long-term Memory for Visual Information , 2022 .

[28]  Surya Gayet,et al.  Between-Subject Variability in the Breaking Continuous Flash Suppression Paradigm: Potential Causes, Consequences, and Solutions , 2017, Front. Psychol..

[29]  P. Schyns,et al.  Usage of spatial scales for the categorization of faces, objects, and scenes , 2001, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[30]  F. Fang,et al.  Cortical responses to invisible objects in the human dorsal and ventral pathways , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.

[31]  R. Blake,et al.  Individual differences in continuous flash suppression: Potency and linkages to binocular rivalry dynamics , 2019, Vision Research.

[32]  R. Blake,et al.  Do recognizable figures enjoy an advantage in binocular rivalry , 1992 .

[33]  S. C. Chong,et al.  Less Is More: Semantic Information Survives Interocular Suppression When Attention Is Diverted , 2016, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[34]  Katie L. H. Gray,et al.  Are visual threats prioritized without awareness? A critical review and meta-analysis involving 3 behavioral paradigms and 2696 observers. , 2016, Psychological bulletin.

[35]  Kevin C. Dieter,et al.  Does visual attention drive the dynamics of bistable perception? , 2016, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.

[36]  Johan Wagemans,et al.  Scene Integration Without Awareness , 2016, Psychological science.

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

[38]  Axel Cleeremans,et al.  Spontaneous eyeblinks during breaking continuous flash suppression are associated with increased detection times. , 2016, Journal of vision.

[39]  Bruno G. Breitmeyer,et al.  Psychophysical “blinding” methods reveal a functional hierarchy of unconscious visual processing , 2015, Consciousness and Cognition.

[40]  R. Blake,et al.  Monocular Perceptual Deprivation from Interocular Suppression Temporarily Imbalances Ocular Dominance , 2017, Current Biology.

[41]  J. Rouder Optional stopping: No problem for Bayesians , 2014, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[42]  Shinya Sakai,et al.  Does the Human Dorsal Stream Really Process a Category for Tools? , 2012, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[43]  Guillaume A. Rousselet,et al.  Beyond differences in means: robust graphical methods to compare two groups in neuroscience , 2017 .

[44]  A. Oliva,et al.  Flexible, Diagnosticity-Driven, Rather Than Fixed, Perceptually Determined Scale Selection in Scene and Face Recognition , 1997, Perception.

[45]  Randolph Blake,et al.  Deconstructing continuous flash suppression. , 2012, Journal of vision.

[46]  P. Hsieh,et al.  Can a Word Sound Like a Shape Before You Have Seen It? Sound-Shape Mapping Prior to Conscious Awareness , 2017, Psychological science.

[47]  Z. Dienes Bayesian Versus Orthodox Statistics: Which Side Are You On? , 2011, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[48]  Sheng He,et al.  Processing of Invisible Stimuli: Advantage of Upright Faces and Recognizable Words in Overcoming Interocular Suppression , 2007, Psychological science.

[49]  Alessio Fracasso,et al.  Unseen complex motion is modulated by attention and generates a visible aftereffect. , 2011, Journal of vision.

[50]  Darya L. Zabelina,et al.  Suppressed semantic information accelerates analytic problem solving , 2013, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[51]  Sheng He,et al.  Seeing the invisible: The scope and limits of unconscious processing in binocular rivalry , 2008, Progress in Neurobiology.

[52]  Antonio Torralba,et al.  Comparison of deep neural networks to spatio-temporal cortical dynamics of human visual object recognition reveals hierarchical correspondence , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[53]  Randolph Blake,et al.  Journal Section: Behavior/systems/cognitive Title: Semantic Analysis Does Not Occur in the Absence of Awareness Induced by Interocular Suppression Abbreviated Title: No Semantic Processing during Interocular Suppression , 2022 .

[54]  Randolph Blake,et al.  Psychophysical magic: rendering the visible ‘invisible’ , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[55]  Chris L. E. Paffen,et al.  Breaking continuous flash suppression: competing for consciousness on the pre-semantic battlefield , 2014, Front. Psychol..

[56]  Alfonso Caramazza,et al.  Unconscious processing dissociates along categorical lines , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[57]  Marcia Grabowecky,et al.  Awareness Becomes Necessary Between Adaptive Pattern Coding of Open and Closed Curvatures , 2011, Psychological science.

[58]  Erik Blaser,et al.  Assessing the kaleidoscope of monocular deprivation effects. , 2018, Journal of vision.

[59]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Binocular Rivalry and Visual Awareness in Human Extrastriate Cortex , 1998, Neuron.

[60]  David Alais,et al.  Strength of continuous flash suppression is optimal when target and masker modulation rates are matched. , 2018, Journal of vision.

[61]  Norbert Kathmann,et al.  Differential modulation of visual object processing in dorsal and ventral stream by stimulus visibility , 2016, Cortex.

[62]  Fang Fang,et al.  A gender- and sexual orientation-dependent spatial attentional effect of invisible images , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[63]  Hugh Rabagliati,et al.  The Importance of Awareness for Understanding Language , 2018, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[64]  D. Alais,et al.  Touch Accelerates Visual Awareness , 2017, i-Perception.

[65]  G. Rees,et al.  Fine-scale activity patterns in high-level visual areas encode the category of invisible objects. , 2008, Journal of vision.

[66]  Dwight J. Kravitz,et al.  Real-World Scene Representations in High-Level Visual Cortex: It's the Spaces More Than the Places , 2011, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[67]  Erich W Graf,et al.  Natural images dominate in binocular rivalry , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[68]  Alexander Todorov,et al.  The determinants of consciousness of human faces , 2018, Nature Human Behaviour.

[69]  Marco Tullio Liuzza,et al.  Subliminal perception of others’ physical pain and pleasure , 2015, Experimental Brain Research.

[70]  Kazushi Maruya,et al.  Adaptation to invisible motion results in low-level but not high-level aftereffects. , 2008, Journal of vision.

[71]  Pietro Perona,et al.  Graph-Based Visual Saliency , 2006, NIPS.

[72]  Wendy J Adams,et al.  Faces and awareness: low-level, not emotional factors determine perceptual dominance. , 2013, Emotion.

[73]  Christof Koch,et al.  A Model of Saliency-Based Visual Attention for Rapid Scene Analysis , 2009 .

[74]  R. Blake,et al.  Normalization Regulates Competition for Visual Awareness , 2012, Neuron.

[75]  J. DiCarlo,et al.  Using goal-driven deep learning models to understand sensory cortex , 2016, Nature Neuroscience.

[76]  Philippe A. Chouinard,et al.  Perceptual size discrimination requires awareness and late visual areas: A continuous flash suppression and interocular transfer study , 2019, Consciousness and Cognition.

[77]  C. Koch,et al.  Continuous flash suppression reduces negative afterimages , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.

[78]  Lisa Feldman Barrett,et al.  Seeing Fear: It’s All in the Eyes? , 2018, Trends in Neurosciences.