Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
(HOW) DOES FEEDBACK PROCESSING CHANGE WHEN VISUAL FEATURES ON DIFFERENT…
(HOW) DOES FEEDBACK PROCESSING CHANGE WHEN VISUAL FEATURES ON DIFFERENT HIERARCHICAL LEVELS ARE MISSING – IS THERE A CHANGE OF STRATEGY TO COPE WITH THESE DIFFERENT MISSING VISUAL FEATURES OR DO WE USE THE SAME STRATEGY IN EVERY SITUATION?
(1) Identify how recurrent processing changes when texforms (generated stimuli which mainly contain low- and mid-level visual features) are shown as opposed to original images
Bronnen
Recurrent processing contributes to categorization and awareness when figure-ground segregation is more demanding and processing contributes to categorization and awareness when figure-ground segregation is more demanding and a low-resolution representation is not sufficient for categorization.
Recurrent Processing Enhances Visual Awareness but Is Not Necessary for Fast Categorization of Natural Scenes
uitkomsten experiment
There is no feedback processing at 13ms for the texforms, but there is for the original images, causing detection to be at or above chance respectively
-
FALSE: If the amount of feedback processing does not change for the texform images and the original images, it could also be possible that texform images need a higher amount of feedback to be detected as opposed to the original image
-
There is less feedforward processing of texform images as opposed to the original images, causing detection to be at or above chance respectively.
-
-
TRUE: low- and mid-level visual features alone are causing a less grand feedforward sweep than all the features together = especially higher visual areas are not being activated fully because high level visual features are missing
FALSE: low- and mid-level visual features alone are causing the full feedforward sweep to be activated --> is this also the case when mainly local details are shown?
-
different feedforward/recurrent/feedback processing at 40ms as opposed to 13ms in an RSVP paradigm, as 40ms is sufficient for detection above chance level for texforms
-
(2) Identify how feedback processing changes when only the local details of an image (this is the anti-image of a texform) are shown as opposed to an original image
(3) Test whether there is a difference in feedback processing between texforms and images mainly containing local details
-
Determine that the found (lack of) effects are not a result of overall diminishment of the stimulus quality by adding different amount of white noise to images
Determine the effect of using different kinds of masks that disrupt the processing of an image during different stages of visual recognition
Is the amount and timing of feedforward/ recurrent/ feedback processing dependent on the quantity of diagnostic visual features = high level (categorical consistent features)?