Abstract
The purpose of the study was to estimate the temporal processing capacity of human object identification under different stimulus conditions. Objects, either facial images or characters, were shown in a rapid sequence on a computer display using a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) method. One of the images was a target and the other images were distracters. The task of the observer was to identify the target. A staircase algorithm was used to determine the threshold frequency of image presentation in the RSVP sequence. The threshold frequency was determined as a function of image contrast, size, and mean luminance. The results showed that the threshold frequency, around 10 Hz for faces (100 ms per face) and about 25 Hz for characters (40 ms per character), was independent of contrast and size at medium and high contrast values, medium and large sizes, and high luminances, but decreased at very low contrasts or small sizes and medium or low levels of luminance. Computer simulations with a model, in which temporal integration limited perceptual speed, suggest that the experimentally found difference in processing time for faces and characters is not due to the physical differences of these stimulus types, but it seems that face-specific sites in the brain process facial information slower than object-specific areas process character information. Contrast, size, and luminance affect the signal-to-noise ratio and the temporal characteristics of low-level neural signal representation. Thus, the results suggest that at low contrasts, low luminances and small sizes, the processing speed of object identification is limited by low-level factors, while at high contrasts and luminances, and at large sizes, processing speed is limited by high-order processing stages. Processing speed seems to depend on stimulus type so that for faces processing is slower than for characters.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Euclidean distance between the ith target g i (x,y) and the temporally filtered RSVP sequence s(x,y,t) at moment t is given by \( E_{i} {\text{ = }}\Sigma \Sigma [g_{i} (x,y) - s(x,y,t)]^{2} \).
References
Allison T, Puce A, Spencer DD, McCarthy G (1999) Electrophysiological studies of human face perception. I: potentials generated in occipitotemporal cortex by face and non-face stimuli. Cereb Cortex 9:415–430
Avidan G, Harel M, Hendler T, Ben-Bashat D, Zohary E, Malach R (2002) Contrast sensitivity in human visual areas and its relationship to object recognition. J Neurophysiol 87:3102–3116
Bacon-Macé N, Macé MJ-M, Fabre-Thorpe M, Thorpe SJ (2005) The time-course of visual processing: backward masking and natural scene categorisation. Vision Res 45:1459–1469
Barlow HB (1957) Increment thresholds at low intensities considered as signal/noise discriminations. J Physiol 136:469–488
Donner K, Fagerholm P (2003) Visual reaction time: neural conditions for the equivalence of stimulus area and contrast. Vision Res 43:2937–2940
Donner K, Koskelainen A, Djupsund K, Hemilä S (1995) Changes in retinal time scale under background light: observations on rods and ganglion cells in the frog retina. Vision Res 35:2255–2266
Grill-Spector K, Kushnir T, Hendler T, Malach R (2000) The dynamics of object selective activation correlates with recognition performance in humans. Nat Neurosci 3:837–843
Hecht S, Shlaer S, Pirenne MH (1942) Energy, quanta, and vision. J Gen Physiol 25:819–840
Johnson JS, Olshausen BA (2003) Timecourse of neural signatures of object recognition. J Vision 3:499–512
Kelly DH (1961) Visual response to time dependent stimuli. I. Amplitude sensitivity measurements. J Opt Soc Am 51:422–429
Keysers C, Xiao D-K, Földiák P, Perrett DI (2001) The speed of sight. J Cogn Neurosci 13:90–101
Liu J, Harris A, Kanwisher N (2002) Stages of processing in face perception: an MEG study. Nat Neurosci 5:910–916
Lu Z-L, Jeon S-T, Dosher BA (2004) Temporal tuning characteristics of the perceptual template and endogenous cuing of spatial attention. Vision Res 44:1333–1350
Maffei L, Fiorentini A (1973) The visual cortex as a spatial frequency analyser. Vision Res 13:1255–1267
McCarthy G, Puce A, Belger A, Allison T (1999) Electrophysiological studies of human face perception. II: response properties of face-specific potentials generated in occipitotemporal cortex. Cereb Cortex 9:431–444
Perrett DI, Rolls ET, Caan W (1982) Visual neurones responsive to faces in monkey temporal cortex. Exp Brain Res 47:329–342
Reich DS, Mechler F, Victor JD (2001) Temporal coding of contrast in primary visual cortex: when, what, and why. J Neurophysiol 85:1039–1050
Tanskanen T, Näsänen R, Montez T, Päällysaho J, Hari R (2005) Face recognition and cortical responses show similar sensitivity to noise spatial frequency. Cereb Cortex 15:526–534
Tarkiainen A, Helenius P, Hansen PC, Cornelissen PL, Salmelin R (1999) Dynamics of letter string perception in the human occipitotemporal cortex. Brain 122:2119–2131
Thomas JP, Fagerholm P, Bonnet C (1999) One spatial filter limits speed of detecting low and middle frequency gratings. Vision Res 39:1683–1693
Thorpe S, Fize D, Marlot C (1996) Speed of processing in the human visual system. Nature 381:520–522
Tolhurst DJ, Movshon JA, Thompson ID (1981) The dependence of response amplitude and variance of cat visual cortical neurones on stimulus contrast. Exp Brain Res 41:414–419
Vassilev A, Mihaylova M, Bonnet C (2002) On the delay of processing high spatial frequency visual information: reaction time and VEP latency study of the effect of local intensity of stimulation. Vision Res 42:851–864
Verstraten FAJ, Cavanagh P, Labianca AT (2000) Limits of attentive tracking reveal temporal properties of attention. Vision Res 40:3651–3664
Wetherill GB, Levitt H (1965) Sequential estimation of points on a psychometric function. Br J Math Stat Psych 18:1–10
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Näsänen, R., Ojanpää, H., Tanskanen, T. et al. Estimation of temporal resolution of object identification in human vision. Exp Brain Res 172, 464–471 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-006-0354-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-006-0354-5