Vase or face? A neural correlate of shape-selective grouping processes in the human brain

Recent neuroimaging studies have described a differential activation pattern associated with specific object images (e.g., face-related and building-related activation) in human occipito-temporal cortex. However, it is as yet unclear to what extent this selectivity is due to differences in the statistics of local object features present in the different object categories, and to what extent it reflects holistic grouping processes operating across the entire object image. To resolve this question it is essential to use images in which identical sets of local features elicit the perception of different object categories. The classic Rubin vase-face illusion provides an excellent experimental set to test this question. In the illusion, the same local contours lead to the perception of different objects (vase or face). Here we employed a modified Rubin vase-face illusion to explore to what extent the activation in face-related regions is attributable to the presence of local face features, or is due to a more holistic grouping process that involves the entire face figure. Biasing cues (gratings and color) were used to control the perceptual state of the observer. We found enhanced activation in face-related regions during the face profile perceptual state compared to the vase perceptual state. Control images ruled out the involvement of the biasing cues in the effect. Thus, object-selective activation in human face-related regions entails global grouping processes that go beyond the local processing of stimulus features.

[1]  R. Malach,et al.  The topography of high-order human object areas , 2002, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[2]  Keiji Tanaka,et al.  Functional architecture in monkey inferotemporal cortex revealed by in vivo optical imaging , 1998, Neuroscience Research.

[3]  J. Haxby,et al.  The distributed human neural system for face perception , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[4]  R. Malach,et al.  Object-related activity revealed by functional magnetic resonance imaging in human occipital cortex. , 1995, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[5]  Richard S. J. Frackowiak,et al.  Human brain activity during spontaneously reversing perception of ambiguous figures , 1998, 5th IEEE EMBS International Summer School on Biomedical Imaging, 2002..

[6]  A. Parker,et al.  Neuronal mechanisms for the perception of ambiguous stimuli , 2003, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[7]  D. Maurer,et al.  The many faces of configural processing , 2002, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[8]  M Fahle,et al.  Correlates of figure-ground segregation in fMRI , 2000, Vision Research.

[9]  Nancy Kanwisher,et al.  fMRI evidence for objects as the units of attentional selection , 1999, Nature.

[10]  Sergio E. Chaigneau,et al.  THE SIMILARITY-IN-TOPOGRAPHY PRINCIPLE: RECONCILING THEORIES OF CONCEPTUAL DEFICITS , 2003, Cognitive neuropsychology.

[11]  E. Halgren,et al.  Location of human face‐selective cortex with respect to retinotopic areas , 1999, Human brain mapping.

[12]  Talma Hendler,et al.  Eccentricity Bias as an Organizing Principle for Human High-Order Object Areas , 2002, Neuron.

[13]  Josh H. McDermott,et al.  Functional imaging of human visual recognition. , 1996, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[14]  Nancy Kanwisher,et al.  A cortical representation of the local visual environment , 1998, Nature.

[15]  Keiji Tanaka,et al.  Inferotemporal cortex and object vision. , 1996, Annual review of neuroscience.

[16]  R. Kimchi,et al.  What does visual agnosia tell us about perceptual organization and its relationship to object perception? , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[17]  K. Nakayama,et al.  RESPONSE PROPERTIES OF THE HUMAN FUSIFORM FACE AREA , 2000, Cognitive neuropsychology.

[18]  K. Grill-Spector,et al.  The dynamics of object-selective activation correlate with recognition performance in humans , 2000, Nature Neuroscience.

[19]  Victor A. F. Lamme The neurophysiology of figure-ground segregation in primary visual cortex , 1995, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[20]  J. Moake,et al.  This article has been cited by other articles , 2003 .

[21]  Victor A. F. Lamme,et al.  Contextual Modulation in Primary Visual Cortex , 1996, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[22]  S. Edelman,et al.  Human Brain Mapping 6:316–328(1998) � A Sequence of Object-Processing Stages Revealed by fMRI in the Human Occipital Lobe , 2022 .

[23]  M Moscovitch,et al.  SUPER FACE-INVERSION EFFECTS FOR ISOLATED INTERNAL OR EXTERNAL FEATURES, AND FOR FRACTURED FACES , 2000, Cognitive neuropsychology.

[24]  T. Hendler,et al.  Object-completion effects in the human lateral occipital complex. , 2002, Cerebral cortex.

[25]  M. D’Esposito,et al.  An Area within Human Ventral Cortex Sensitive to “Building” Stimuli Evidence and Implications , 1998, Neuron.

[26]  Rafael Malach,et al.  Face-selective Activation in a Congenital Prosopagnosic Subject , 2003, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

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

[28]  K. Grill-Spector The neural basis of object perception , 2003, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[29]  R Shapley,et al.  Illusory contours activate specific regions in human visual cortex: evidence from functional magnetic resonance imaging. , 1995, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[30]  N. Logothetis,et al.  Multistable phenomena: changing views in perception , 1999, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[31]  A. Dale,et al.  The Representation of Illusory and Real Contours in Human Cortical Visual Areas Revealed by Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging , 1999, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[32]  M. Farah,et al.  What is "special" about face perception? , 1998, Psychological review.

[33]  D. Heeger,et al.  Neuronal activity in human primary visual cortex correlates with perception during binocular rivalry , 2000, Nature Neuroscience.

[34]  Keiji Tanaka,et al.  Coding visual images of objects in the inferotemporal cortex of the macaque monkey. , 1991, Journal of neurophysiology.

[35]  Timothy J. Andrews,et al.  Activity in the Fusiform Gyrus Predicts Conscious Perception of Rubin's Vase–Face Illusion , 2002, NeuroImage.

[36]  S. Edelman,et al.  Cue-Invariant Activation in Object-Related Areas of the Human Occipital Lobe , 1998, Neuron.

[37]  D. Mumford,et al.  The role of the primary visual cortex in higher level vision , 1998, Vision Research.

[38]  S. Edelman,et al.  Differential Processing of Objects under Various Viewing Conditions in the Human Lateral Occipital Complex , 1999, Neuron.

[39]  Leslie G. Ungerleider,et al.  Distributed representation of objects in the human ventral visual pathway. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[40]  N. Kanwisher,et al.  The lateral occipital complex and its role in object recognition , 2001, Vision Research.

[41]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  How the brain learns to see objects and faces in an impoverished context , 1997, Nature.

[42]  N. Kanwisher,et al.  Cortical Regions Involved in Perceiving Object Shape , 2000, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[43]  Ravi S. Menon,et al.  The effects of visual object priming on brain activation before and after recognition , 2000, Current Biology.

[44]  N. Logothetis,et al.  What is rivalling during binocular rivalry , 1996 .

[45]  R. von der Heydt,et al.  Coding of Border Ownership in Monkey Visual Cortex , 2000, The Journal of Neuroscience.