ArticleNeuroImage2022
The strength of feedback processing is associated with resistance to visual backward masking during Illusory Contour processing in adult humans.
Article in NeuroImage, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cortical Dynamics Underlying Perceived Visibility: An Event-Related Potential Investigation of Forward Masking.The European journal of neuroscience · 2025Article
- It's all in the timing: delayed feedback in autism may weaken predictive mechanisms during contour integration.Journal of neurophysiology · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Re-entrant feedback processing is a key mechanism of visual object-recognition, especially under compromised viewing conditions where only sparse information is available and object features must be interpolated. Illusory Contour stimuli are commonly used in conjunction with Visual Evoked Potentials (VEP) to study these filling-in processes, with characteristic modulation of the VEP in the ∼100-150 ms timeframe associated with this re-entrant processing. Substantial inter-individual variability in timing and amplitude of feedback-related VEP modulation is observed, raising the question whether this variability might underlie inter-individual differences in the ability to form strong perceptual gestalts. Backward masking paradig ms have been used to study inter-individual variance in the ability to form robust object perceptions before processing of the mask interferes with object-recognition. Some individuals recognize objects when the time between target object and mask is extremely short, whereas others struggle to do so even at longer target-to-mask intervals. We asked whether timing and amplitude of feedback-related VEP modulations were associated with individual differences in resistance to backward masking. Participants (N=40) showed substantial performance variability in detecting Illusory Contours at intermediate target-to-mask intervals (67 ms and 117 ms), allowing us to use kmeans clustering to divide the population into four performance groups (poor, low-average, high-average, superior). There was a clear relationship between the amplitude (but not the timing) of feedback-related VEP modulation and Illusory Contour detection during backward masking. We conclude that individual differences in the strength of feedback processing in neurotypical humans lead to differences in the ability to quickly establish perceptual awareness of incomplete visual objects.
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.