Interactions between Orientation and Contrast Modulations Suggest Limited Cross-Cue Linkage

Citations Over Time

Abstract

Recent studies of texture segmentation and second-order vision have proposed very similar models for the detection of orientation modulation and contrast modulation (OM and CM). From the similarity of the models it is tempting to assume that the two cues might be processed by a single generalised texture mechanism; however, recent results (Kingdom et al, 2003 Visual Neuroscience 2 65-76) have suggested that these cues are detected independently, or at least in a mechanism that is able to maintain an apparent independence between the cues. We tested new combinations of OM and CM and found that CM at 0.4 cycle deg(-1) facilitates the detection of OM at 0.2 cycle deg(-1) when the peaks of contrast align with the extremes of orientation. There is also some evidence of weak facilitation of CM by OM under the same conditions. Further, this facilitation can be predicted by filter--rectify--filter channels optimised for the detection of each cue, adding weight to the argument that texture cues are processed in a single generalised mechanism that nonetheless achieves cue independence or near-independence in many circumstances. We also found that the amount of suprathreshold masking produced by an orientation cue depends on the overall percept formed by that cue.

Related Papers

• → Percept—Percept Couplings(1982)79 cited
• → Dynamical vs. judgmental comparison: hysteresis effects in motion perception(2005)29 cited
• → How stable is perception in #TheDress and #TheShoe?(2020)9 cited
• → PERCEPT-PERCEPT METHODS IN PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH ON ORGANIZATION: A META-ANALYTIC INVESTIGATION OF ARTIFACTUAL EFFECTS.(1990)7 cited
• → Perceptual reports vs recognition responses: A reply to Parks(1968)3 cited