HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Fahrenfort, J. J. Articles by Lamme, V. A. F. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Fahrenfort, J. J. Articles by Lamme, V. A. F.

Masking Disrupts Reentrant Processing in Human Visual Cortex

¹ University of Amsterdam, ² Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience, Amsterdam

Reprint requests should be sent to J. J. Fahrenfort, Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Roetersstraat 15, 1018 WB Amsterdam, the Netherlands, or via e-mail: j.j.fahrenfort{at}uva.nl.

In masking, a stimulus is rendered invisible through the presentation of a second stimulus shortly after the first. Over the years, authors have typically explained masking by postulating some early disruption process. In these feedforward-type explanations, the mask somehow "catches up" with the target stimulus, disrupting its processing either through lateral or interchannel inhibition. However, studies from recent years indicate that visual perception—and most notably visual awareness itself—may depend strongly on cortico-cortical feedback connections from higher to lower visual areas. This has led some researchers to propose that masking derives its effectiveness from selectively interrupting these reentrant processes. In this experiment, we used electroencephalogram measurements to determine what happens in the human visual cortex during detection of a texture-defined square under nonmasked (seen) and masked (unseen) conditions. Electroencephalogram derivatives that are typically associated with reentrant processing turn out to be absent in the masked condition. Moreover, extrastriate visual areas are still activated early on by both seen and unseen stimuli, as shown by scalp surface Laplacian current source-density maps. This conclusively shows that feedforward processing is preserved, even when subject performance is at chance as determined by objective measures. From these results, we conclude that masking derives its effectiveness, at least partly, from disrupting reentrant processing, thereby interfering with the neural mechanisms of figure–ground segmentation and visual awareness itself.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. van Gaal, K. R. Ridderinkhof, J. J. Fahrenfort, H. S. Scholte, and V. A. F. Lamme Frontal Cortex Mediates Unconsciously Triggered Inhibitory Control J. Neurosci., August 6, 2008; 28(32): 8053 - 8062. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]