ArticleVision research2020
Contingent adaptation in masking and surround suppression.
Article in Vision research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Alterations in center-surround contrast suppression in patients with major depressive disorder.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Temporal dynamics of normalization reweighting.Journal of vision · 2023Article
- Steady-state measures of visual suppression.PLoS computational biology · 2021Article
- Explaining Orientation Adaptation in V1 by Updating the State of a Spatial Model.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2021Article
- Temporal Contingencies Determine Whether Adaptation Strengthens or Weakens Normalization.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Adaptation is the process that changes a neuron's response based on recent inputs. In the traditional model, a neuron's state of adaptation depends on the recent input to that neuron alone, whereas in a recently introduced model (Hebbian normalization), adaptation depends on the structure of neural correlated firing. In particular, increased response products between pairs of neurons leads to increased mutual suppression. We test a psychophysical prediction of this model: adaptation should depend on 2nd-order statistics of input stimuli. That is, if two stimuli excite two distinct sub-populations of neurons, then presenting those stimuli simultaneously during adaptation should strengthen mutual suppression between those subpopulations. We confirm this prediction in two experiments. In the first, pairing two gratings synchronously during adaptation (i.e., a plaid) rather than asynchronously (interleaving the two gratings in time) leads to increased effectiveness of one pattern for masking the other. In the second, pairing the gratings in a center-surround configuration results in reduced apparent contrast for the central grating when paired with the same surround (as compared with a condition in which the central grating appears with a different surround at test than during adaptation). These results are consistent with the prediction that an increase in response covariance leads to greater mutual suppression between neurons. This effect is detectable both at threshold (masking) and well above threshold (apparent contrast).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.