At 120 msec You Can Spot the Animal but You Don't Yet Know It's a Dog

Earlier studies suggested that the visual system processes information at the basic level (e.g., dog) faster than at the subordinate (e.g., Dalmatian) or superordinate (e.g., animals) levels. However, the advantage of the basic category over the superordinate category in object recognition has been challenged recently, and the hierarchical nature of visual categorization is now a matter of debate. To address this issue, we used a forced-choice saccadic task in which a target and a distractor image were displayed simultaneously on each trial and participants had to saccade as fast as possible toward the image containing animal targets based on different categorization levels. This protocol enables us to investigate the first 100–120 msec, a previously unexplored temporal window, of visual object categorization. The first result is a surprising stability of the saccade latency (median RT ∼155 msec) regardless of the animal target category and the dissimilarity of target and distractor image sets. Accuracy was high (around 80% correct) for categorization tasks that can be solved at the superordinate level but dropped to almost chance levels for basic level categorization. At the basic level, the highest accuracy (62%) was obtained when distractors were restricted to another dissimilar basic category. Computational simulations based on the saliency map model showed that the results could not be predicted by pure bottom–up saliency differences between images. Our results support a model of visual recognition in which the visual system can rapidly access relatively coarse visual representations that provide information at the superordinate level of an object, but where additional visual analysis is required to allow more detailed categorization at the basic level.

[1]  Ehud Zohary,et al.  Two Phases of V1 Activity for Visual Recognition of Natural Images , 2010, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[2]  Juan R. Vidal,et al.  Selective Neural Synchrony Suppression as a Forward Gatekeeper to Piecemeal Conscious Perception. , 2016, Cerebral cortex.

[3]  G. Rousselet,et al.  Is it an animal? Is it a human face? Fast processing in upright and inverted natural scenes. , 2003, Journal of vision.

[4]  Michèle Fabre-Thorpe,et al.  Stimulus duration and diversity do not reverse the advantage for superordinate‐level representations: the animal is seen before the bird , 2014, The European journal of neuroscience.

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

[6]  C. Koch,et al.  Computational modelling of visual attention , 2001, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[7]  J. Gold,et al.  The neural basis of decision making. , 2007, Annual review of neuroscience.

[8]  N. Kanwisher,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article Visual Recognition As Soon as You Know It Is There, You Know What It Is , 2022 .

[9]  S. Thorpe,et al.  Speed of processing in the human visual system , 1996, Nature.

[10]  Michèle Fabre-Thorpe,et al.  Effects of task requirements on rapid natural scene processing: from common sensory encoding to distinct decisional mechanisms. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[11]  K. Mohan,et al.  Similarity relations in visual search predict rapid visual categorization. , 2012, Journal of vision.

[12]  Wayne D. Gray,et al.  Basic objects in natural categories , 1976, Cognitive Psychology.

[13]  Jeffrey S. Bowers And,et al.  Short Article: Detecting Objects is Easier than Categorizing Them , 2008, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[14]  Stephen M. Kosslyn,et al.  Pictures and names: Making the connection , 1984, Cognitive Psychology.

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

[16]  S. Thorpe,et al.  How parallel is visual processing in the ventral pathway? , 2004, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[17]  S. Thorpe,et al.  A Limit to the Speed of Processing in Ultra-Rapid Visual Categorization of Novel Natural Scenes , 2001, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[18]  Keiji Tanaka,et al.  Matching Categorical Object Representations in Inferior Temporal Cortex of Man and Monkey , 2008, Neuron.

[19]  Mary-Ellen Large,et al.  Electrophysiological correlates of object categorization: back to basics. , 2004, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[20]  Keiji Tanaka,et al.  Object category structure in response patterns of neuronal population in monkey inferior temporal cortex. , 2007, Journal of neurophysiology.

[21]  Christof Koch,et al.  Modeling attention to salient proto-objects , 2006, Neural Networks.

[22]  Michèle Fabre-Thorpe,et al.  The Characteristics and Limits of Rapid Visual Categorization , 2011, Front. Psychology.

[23]  Guillaume A. Rousselet,et al.  Parallel processing in high-level categorization of natural images , 2002, Nature Neuroscience.

[24]  J. Tanaka,et al.  Object categories and expertise: Is the basic level in the eye of the beholder? , 1991, Cognitive Psychology.

[25]  T. Rogers,et al.  Object categorization: reversals and explanations of the basic-level advantage. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[26]  P. Perona,et al.  What do we perceive in a glance of a real-world scene? , 2007, Journal of vision.

[27]  G Richard,et al.  Ultra-rapid categorisation of natural scenes does not rely on colour cues: a study in monkeys and humans , 2000, Vision Research.

[28]  C. Koch,et al.  A saliency-based search mechanism for overt and covert shifts of visual attention , 2000, Vision Research.

[29]  M. Tarr,et al.  Levels of categorization in visual recognition studied using functional magnetic resonance imaging , 1997, Current Biology.

[30]  I. Biederman,et al.  On the information extracted from a glance at a scene. , 1974, Journal of experimental psychology.

[31]  R VanRullen,et al.  Is it a Bird? Is it a Plane? Ultra-Rapid Visual Categorisation of Natural and Artifactual Objects , 2001, Perception.

[32]  Simon J. Thorpe,et al.  Ultra-rapid object detection with saccadic eye movements: Visual processing speed revisited , 2006, Vision Research.

[33]  Sébastien M. Crouzet,et al.  Fast saccades toward faces: face detection in just 100 ms. , 2010, Journal of vision.

[34]  J. Smeets,et al.  Nature of variability in saccades. , 2003, Journal of neurophysiology.

[35]  G. Murphy,et al.  Categorizing objects in isolation and in scenes: what a superordinate is good for. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[36]  M. Potter Short-term conceptual memory for pictures. , 1976, Journal of experimental psychology. Human learning and memory.

[37]  Leslie G. Ungerleider,et al.  The neural systems that mediate human perceptual decision making , 2008, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[38]  Olivier R. Joubert,et al.  The Time-Course of Visual Categorizations: You Spot the Animal Faster than the Bird , 2009, PloS one.

[39]  N. Kriegeskorte,et al.  Author ' s personal copy Representational geometry : integrating cognition , computation , and the brain , 2013 .

[40]  H. Brownell,et al.  Category differentiation in object recognition: typicality constraints on the basic category advantage. , 1985, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[41]  Simon J Thorpe,et al.  Animals roll around the clock: the rotation invariance of ultrarapid visual processing. , 2006, Journal of vision.

[42]  J. Duncan,et al.  Visual search and stimulus similarity. , 1989, Psychological review.

[43]  Isabel Gauthier,et al.  Object detection and basic-level categorization: Sometimes you know it is there before you know what it is , 2008, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[44]  Robert M. McPeek,et al.  What neural pathways mediate express saccades? , 1993, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[45]  P. Glimcher The neurobiology of visual-saccadic decision making. , 2003, Annual review of neuroscience.

[46]  Philip L. Smith,et al.  Psychology and neurobiology of simple decisions , 2004, Trends in Neurosciences.

[47]  Keiji Tanaka,et al.  Differences in onset latency of macaque inferotemporal neural responses to primate and non-primate faces. , 2005, Journal of neurophysiology.

[48]  Guillaume A. Rousselet,et al.  Processing scene context: Fast categorization and object interference , 2007, Vision Research.