Persistence and accommodation in short-term priming and other perceptual paradigms: temporal segregation through synaptic depression

Perceptual input changes constantly in an unpredictable fashion, often changing before our somewhat sluggish perceptual systems have adequately processed this input. This can give rise to source confusion—how do we know whether a given perceptual activation is due to the current input, or a previous input that had yet to be completely processed? We propose that activity-dependent neural accommodation naturally limits this source confusion by suppressing items once they have been identified. We review behavioral paradigms from different literatures that measure the correlates of persistence and accommodation. Of the various accommodative mechanisms, we focus on synaptic depression, deriving a rate-coded expression that can be used to produce accommodating dynamics in any neural network with real valued activation. We implement this expression in a hierarchical model of perception termed, “a neural mechanism for responding optimally with unknown sources of evidence” (nROUSE). This model can be viewed as a more detailed version of the more abstract ROUSE model of Huber, Shiffrin, Lyle, and Ruys (2001), which produces accommodated levels of feature evidence through an optimal calculation. We apply nROUSE to three short-term priming experiments that manipulated prime duration. © 2003 Cognitive Science Society, Inc. All rights reserved.

[1]  R M Shiffrin,et al.  Perception and preference in short-term word priming. , 2001, Psychological review.

[2]  Frances S. Chance,et al.  Synaptic Depression and the Temporal Response Characteristics of V1 Cells , 1998, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[3]  D. Plaut,et al.  The impact of synaptic depression following brain damage: A connectionist account of “access/refractory” and “degraded-store” semantic impairments , 2002, Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience.

[4]  L. Abbott,et al.  Synaptic Depression and Cortical Gain Control , 1997, Science.

[5]  L. F. Abbott,et al.  Functional signatificance of synaptic depression between cortical neurons , 1997 .

[6]  H. Markram,et al.  The neural code between neocortical pyramidal neurons depends on neurotransmitter release probability. , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[7]  Raymond M. Klein,et al.  On the causes and effects of inhibition of return , 1998 .

[8]  Richard M Shiffrin,et al.  Mechanisms of source confusion and discounting in short-term priming: 1. Effects of prime duration and prime recognition , 2002, Memory & cognition.

[9]  R. O’Reilly Six principles for biologically based computational models of cortical cognition , 1998, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[10]  V. Lollo,et al.  Beyond Visible Persistence: An Alternative Account of Temporal Integration and Segregation in Visual Processing , 1994, Cognitive Psychology.

[11]  A. O'Toole,et al.  Prototype-referenced shape encoding revealed by high-level aftereffects , 2001, Nature Neuroscience.

[12]  I. J. Myung,et al.  Toward a method of selecting among computational models of cognition. , 2002, Psychological review.

[13]  M. Coltheart,et al.  Iconic memory and visible persistence , 1980, Perception & psychophysics.

[14]  G. Miller,et al.  Cognitive science. , 1981, Science.

[15]  Lovorka Pantic,et al.  Storage capacity of attractor neural networks with depressing synapses. , 2002, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[16]  R. Zajonc,et al.  Affect, cognition, and awareness: affective priming with optimal and suboptimal stimulus exposures. , 1993, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[17]  R. Klein,et al.  Evidence for semantic satiation : Repeating a category slows subsequent semantic processing , 1990 .

[18]  Garrison W. Cottrell,et al.  Analysis of Oscillations in a Reciprocally Inhibitory Network with Synaptic Depression , 2002, Neural Computation.

[19]  J H Hogben,et al.  Perceptual integration and perceptual segregation of brief visual stimuli. , 1974, Vision research.

[20]  Denis Cousineau,et al.  A Race Model of Perceptual Forced Choice Reaction Time , 2003 .

[21]  Hilbert J. Kappen,et al.  On the role of dynamical synapses in coincidence detection , 2001, Neurocomputing.

[22]  Carson C. Chow,et al.  A Spiking Neuron Model for Binocular Rivalry , 2004, Journal of Computational Neuroscience.

[23]  J. Raaijmakers,et al.  Testing the counter model for perceptual identification: Effects of repetition priming and word frequency , 2000, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[24]  Farzan Nadim,et al.  Synaptic Depression Mediates Bistability in Neuronal Networks with Recurrent Inhibitory Connectivity , 2001, The Journal of Neuroscience.

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

[26]  Hilbert J. Kappen,et al.  Associative Memory with Dynamic Synapses , 2002, Neural Computation.

[27]  George Sperling,et al.  The information available in brief visual presentations. , 1960 .

[28]  G. Loftus,et al.  Sensory and cognitive components of visual information acquisition. , 1994, Psychological review.

[29]  Michael J. Frank,et al.  Interactions between frontal cortex and basal ganglia in working memory: A computational model , 2001, Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience.

[30]  Hugo Maes,et al.  Visual cortical correlates of visible persistence , 1985, Vision Research.

[31]  Thomas C. Toppino,et al.  Prime time: Fatigue and set effects in the perception of reversible figures , 1992, Perception & psychophysics.

[32]  Richard M Shiffrin,et al.  Mechanisms of source confusion and discounting in short-term priming 2: effects of prime similarity and target duration. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.