Effective Connectivity within Human Primary Visual Cortex Predicts Interindividual Diversity in Illusory Perception

Visual perception depends strongly on spatial context. A classic example is the tilt illusion where the perceived orientation of a central stimulus differs from its physical orientation when surrounded by tilted spatial contexts. Here we show that such contextual modulation of orientation perception exhibits trait-like interindividual diversity that correlates with interindividual differences in effective connectivity within human primary visual cortex. We found that the degree to which spatial contexts induced illusory orientation perception, namely, the magnitude of the tilt illusion, varied across healthy human adults in a trait-like fashion independent of stimulus size or contrast. Parallel to contextual modulation of orientation perception, the presence of spatial contexts affected effective connectivity within human primary visual cortex between peripheral and foveal representations that responded to spatial context and central stimulus, respectively. Importantly, this effective connectivity from peripheral to foveal primary visual cortex correlated with interindividual differences in the magnitude of the tilt illusion. Moreover, this correlation with illusion perception was observed for effective connectivity under tilted contextual stimulation but not for that under iso-oriented contextual stimulation, suggesting that it reflected the impact of orientation-dependent intra-areal connections. Our findings revealed an interindividual correlation between intra-areal connectivity within primary visual cortex and contextual influence on orientation perception. This neurophysiological-perceptual link provides empirical evidence for theoretical proposals that intra-areal connections in early visual cortices are involved in contextual modulation of visual perception.

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

[2]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Nonlinear Responses in fMRI: The Balloon Model, Volterra Kernels, and Other Hemodynamics , 2000, NeuroImage.

[3]  C. Segebarth,et al.  Identifying Neural Drivers with Functional MRI: An Electrophysiological Validation , 2008, PLoS biology.

[4]  R. Reid,et al.  Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience Cellular Neuroscience Methods Article , 2022 .

[5]  D. Fitzpatrick,et al.  Patterns of excitation and inhibition evoked by horizontal connections in visual cortex share a common relationship to orientation columns , 1995, Neuron.

[6]  D. Perkel,et al.  Simultaneously Recorded Trains of Action Potentials: Analysis and Functional Interpretation , 1969, Science.

[7]  H. Leibowitz,et al.  The effect of rotation and tilt on the magnitude of the Poggendorf illusion. , 1966, Vision research.

[8]  J. Movshon,et al.  Time Course and Time-Distance Relationships for Surround Suppression in Macaque V1 Neurons , 2003, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[9]  M. Sur,et al.  Dynamic properties of recurrent inhibition in primary visual cortex: contrast and orientation dependence of contextual effects. , 2000, Journal of neurophysiology.

[10]  J. Bullier,et al.  Reaching beyond the classical receptive field of V1 neurons: horizontal or feedback axons? , 2003, Journal of Physiology-Paris.

[11]  D. Tolhurst,et al.  Orientation illusions and after-effects: Inhibition between channels , 1975, Vision Research.

[12]  Victor A. F. Lamme,et al.  Feedforward, horizontal, and feedback processing in the visual cortex , 1998, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[13]  Nikolaus Weiskopf,et al.  High-Resolution Functional MRI at 3 T: 3D/2D Echo-Planar Imaging with Optimized Physiological Noise Correction , 2012, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[14]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  Mapping anatomical connectivity patterns of human cerebral cortex using in vivo diffusion tensor imaging tractography. , 2009, Cerebral cortex.

[15]  F A Wichmann,et al.  Ning for Helpful Comments and Suggestions. This Paper Benefited Con- Siderably from Conscientious Peer Review, and We Thank Our Reviewers the Psychometric Function: I. Fitting, Sampling, and Goodness of Fit , 2001 .

[16]  Karl J. Friston Modalities, Modes, and Models in Functional Neuroimaging , 2009, Science.

[17]  K. Obermayer,et al.  The Role of Feedback in Shaping the Extra-Classical Receptive Field of Cortical Neurons: A Recurrent Network Model , 2006, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[18]  William D. Penny,et al.  Comparing Dynamic Causal Models using AIC, BIC and Free Energy , 2012, NeuroImage.

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

[20]  J. B. Levitt,et al.  Contrast dependence of contextual effects in primate visual cortex , 1997, nature.

[21]  P. Wenderoth,et al.  The tilt illusion as a function of the relative and absolute lengths of test and inducing lines , 1986, Perception & psychophysics.

[22]  Peter Wenderoth,et al.  Large repulsion, but not attraction, tilt illusions occur when stimulus parameters selectively favour either transient (M-like) or sustained (P-like) mechanisms , 1999, Vision Research.

[23]  T. Oyama,et al.  Determinants of the Zöllner illusion , 1975, Psychological research.

[24]  David Kleinfeld,et al.  Chronic optical access through a polished and reinforced thinned skull. , 2010, Nature methods.

[25]  H Preißl,et al.  Dynamics of activity and connectivity in physiological neuronal networks , 1991 .

[26]  P. J. Sjöström,et al.  Functional specificity of local synaptic connections in neocortical networks , 2011, Nature.

[27]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Dynamic causal modelling , 2003, NeuroImage.

[28]  Jean Bennett,et al.  Lateral Connectivity and Contextual Interactions in Macaque Primary Visual Cortex , 2002, Neuron.

[29]  P. Wenderoth,et al.  The different mechanisms of the direct and indirect tilt illusions , 1988, Vision Research.

[30]  G. Rees,et al.  The structural basis of inter-individual differences in human behaviour and cognition , 2011, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[31]  Risto Miikkulainen,et al.  Tilt Aftereffects in a Self-Organizing Model of the Primary Visual Cortex , 2000, Neural Computation.

[32]  Mark W. Woolrich,et al.  Network modelling methods for FMRI , 2011, NeuroImage.

[33]  The Half-Zöllner Illusion , 1996, Perception.

[34]  William D. Penny,et al.  Bayesian model selection and averaging , 2007 .

[35]  P. Dayan,et al.  Space and time in visual context , 2007, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[36]  P. Dayan,et al.  Perceptual organization in the tilt illusion. , 2009, Journal of vision.

[37]  C. Blakemore,et al.  Characteristics of surround inhibition in cat area 17 , 1997, Experimental Brain Research.

[38]  D. Fitzpatrick,et al.  Orientation Selectivity and the Arrangement of Horizontal Connections in Tree Shrew Striate Cortex , 1997, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[39]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  The Dynamic Brain: From Spiking Neurons to Neural Masses and Cortical Fields , 2008, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[40]  Karl J. Friston Functional and Effective Connectivity: A Review , 2011, Brain Connect..