Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30596644›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2018

Scene complexity modulates degree of feedback activity during object detection in natural scenes.

Iris I A Groen, Sara Jahfari, Noor Seijdel, Sennay Ghebreab, Victor A F Lamme, H Steven Scholte

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Complexity Matters: Normalization to Prototypical Viewpoint Induces Memory Distortion along the Vertical Axis of Scenes.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Iris I A GroenNew York University, Department of Psychology, New York, New York, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-5536-6128
Sara JahfariSpinoza Centre for Neuroimaging, Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-1979-589X
Noor SeijdelUniversity of Amsterdam, Department of Psychology, Section Brain and Cognition, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8785-8135
Sennay GhebreabUniversity of Amsterdam, Department of Psychology, Section Brain and Cognition, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Victor A F LammeUniversity of Amsterdam, Department of Psychology, Section Brain and Cognition, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4013-3687
H Steven ScholteUniversity of Amsterdam, Department of Psychology, Section Brain and Cognition, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-9839-1788

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Selective brain responses to objects arise within a few hundreds of milliseconds of neural processing, suggesting that visual object recognition is mediated by rapid feed-forward activations. Yet disruption of neural responses in early visual cortex beyond feed-forward processing stages affects object recognition performance. Here, we unite these discrepant findings by reporting that object recognition involves enhanced feedback activity (recurrent processing within early visual cortex) when target objects are embedded in natural scenes that are characterized by high complexity. Human participants performed an animal target detection task on natural scenes with low, medium or high complexity as determined by a computational model of low-level contrast statistics. Three converging lines of evidence indicate that feedback was selectively enhanced for high complexity scenes. First, functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) activity in early visual cortex (V1) was enhanced for target objects in scenes with high, but not low or medium complexity. Second, event-related potentials (ERPs) evoked by target objects were selectively enhanced at feedback stages of visual processing (from ~220 ms onwards) for high complexity scenes only. Third, behavioral performance for high complexity scenes deteriorated when participants were pressed for time and thus less able to incorporate the feedback activity. Modeling of the reaction time distributions using drift diffusion revealed that object information accumulated more slowly for high complexity scenes, with evidence accumulation being coupled to trial-to-trial variation in the EEG feedback response. Together, these results suggest that while feed-forward activity may suffice to recognize isolated objects, the brain employs recurrent processing more adaptively in naturalistic settings, using minimal feedback for simple scenes and increasing feedback for complex scenes.

Indexed as

Models, NeurologicalAdultAnimalsBrainBrain MappingComputational BiologyElectroencephalographyEvoked PotentialsFeedback, PhysiologicalFeedback, PsychologicalFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleModels, PsychologicalPattern Recognition, Visual

Identifiers

PMID30596644
PMCPMC6329519

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.