Preserved Striate Cortex is Not Sufficient to Support the McCollough Effect: Evidence from two Patients with Cerebral Achromatopsia

The McCollough effect (ME) is a colour aftereffect contingent on pattern orientation. This effect is generally thought to be mediated by primary visual cortex (V1) although this has remained the subject of some debate. To determine whether V1 is in fact sufficient to subserve the ME, we compared McCollough adaptation in controls to adaptation in two patients with damage to ventrotemporal cortex, resulting in achromatopsia, but who have spared V1. Each of these patients has some residual colour abilities of which he is unaware. Participants performed a 2AFC orientation-discrimination task for pairs of oblique and vertical/horizontal gratings both before and after adaptation to red/green oblique induction gratings. Successful ME induction would manifest itself as an improvement in oblique-orientation discrimination owing to the additional colour cue after adaptation. Indeed, in controls oblique grating discrimination improved post-adaptation. Further, a subdivision of our control group demonstrated successful ME induction despite a lack of conscious awareness of the added colour cue, indicating that conscious colour awareness is not required for ME induction. The patients, however, did not show improvement in oblique-orientation discrimination, indicating a lack of ME induction. This suggests that V1 must be connected to higher cortical colour areas to drive ME induction.

Hand preference for precision grasping predicts language lateralization

We investigated whether or not there is a relationship between hand preference for grasping and hemispheric dominance for language--and how each of these is related to other traditional measures of handedness. To do this we asked right- and left-handed participants to put together two different sets of 3D puzzles made out of big or very small LEGO pieces. Participants were also given two self-reported handedness questionnaires, as well as tests of grip force and finger tapping speed. A language lateralization (dichotic listening) test was also administered. We found a positive correlation between hand use for precision grasping and language lateralization (i.e. the more participants used their right hand for grasping the small LEGO pieces, the more language was lateralized to the left hemisphere). In addition, we identified two populations of left-handers according to their grasping performance: 'left-right-handers', who behaved exactly like right-handers; and 'left-left-handers' whose performance was the mirror image of that of right-handers. Finally, we found an increase in right-hand use when right-handers and 'left-right-handers' had to pick up the small LEGO pieces. We discuss our results in relation to recent notions of left-hemisphere specialization for visually guided actions and its relationship with the evolution of language.

FMRI adaptation during performance of learned arbitrary visuomotor conditional associations

In everyday life, people select motor responses according to arbitrary rules. For example, our movements while driving a car can be instructed by color cues that we see on traffic lights. These stimuli do not spatially relate to the actions that they specify. Associations between these stimuli and actions are called arbitrary visuomotor conditional associations. Earlier fMRI studies have tried to dissociate the sensory and motor components of these associations by introducing delays between the presentation of arbitrary cues and go-signals that instructed participants to perform actions. This approach, however, also introduces neural processes that are not necessarily related to the normal real-time production of arbitrary visuomotor responses, such as working memory and the suppression of motor responses. We used fMRI adaptation as an alternative approach to dissociate sensory and motor components. We found that visual areas in the occipital-temporal cortex adapted only to the presentation of arbitrary visual cues whereas a number of sensorimotor areas adapted only to the production of response. Visual areas in the occipital-temporal cortex do not have any known connections with parts of the brain that can control hand musculature. Therefore, it is conceivable that the brain areas that we report as having adapted to both stimulus presentation and response production (namely, the dorsal premotor area, the supplementary motor area, the cingulate, the anterior intra-parietal sulcus area, and the thalamus) are involved in the multiple steps between processing visual stimuli and activating the motor commands that these cues specify.

Asymmetric interference between the perception of shape and the perception of surface properties

We previously showed that the processing of shape and the processing of surface properties linked to material properties engage different regions of the ventral stream (J. S. Cant & M. A. Goodale, 2007). Moreover, we recently used Garner's speeded-classification task to show that varying the surface (material) properties of objects does not interfere with shape judgments and vice versa (J. S. Cant, M. E. Large, L. McCall, & M. A. Goodale, 2008). In the present study, we looked at Garner interference when surface cues contributed to the perception of object shape and hypothesized that this would interfere with judgments about the width and the length of the objects. In contrast, we predicted that varying the width and the length of the objects would not interfere with surface-property judgments. This is precisely what we found. These results suggest that the shape and the surface properties of an object cannot be processed independently when both these sets of cues are linked to the perception of the object's overall shape. These observations, together with our previous findings, suggest that the surface cues that contribute to object shape are processed quite separately from the surface cues that are linked to an object's material properties.

Action without perception in human vision

In 1992, David Milner and I (Goodale & Milner, 1992) proposed a division of labour in the visual pathways of the primate cerebral cortex between a dorsal stream specialized for the visual control of action and a ventral stream dedicated to constructing our percepts of the visual world. Support for the perception-action distinction has come from neuroimaging experiments, human neuropsychology, and monkey neurophysiology. Differences in the timing and spatial metrics of vision-for-perception and vision-for-action have been studied in human psychophysical experiments, particularly in those that have looked at the way in which each system deals with pictorial illusions. Although the literature is not free from controversy, a large number of studies have found that actions such as grasping and reaching are often unaffected by high-level pictorial illusions, which by definition affect perception. Recent experiments have shown that for actions to escape the effects of such illusions, however, they must be highly practised actions, preferably with the right hand, and must be directed in real time at visible targets. But even though the behavioural evidence suggests that the dorsal and ventral streams make use of different timing, different metrics, and different frames of reference in carrying out their computations, there is a seamless interaction between the two streams in the production of adaptive behaviour. A full understanding of the integrated nature of visually guided behaviour will require that we specify the nature of the interactions and information exchange that occur between these two streams of visual processing.

Crinkling and crumpling: an auditory fMRI study of material properties

Knowledge of an object's material composition (i.e., what it is made of) alters how we interact with that object. Seeing the bright glint or hearing the metallic crinkle of a foil plate for example, confers information about that object before we have even touched it. Recent research indicates that the medial aspect of the ventral visual pathway is sensitive to the surface properties of objects. In the present functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study, we investigated whether the ventral pathway is also sensitive to material properties derived from sound alone. Relative to scrambled material sounds and non-verbal human vocalizations, audio recordings of materials being manipulated (i.e., crumpled) in someone's hands elicited greater BOLD activity in the right parahippocampal cortex of neurologically intact listeners, as well as a cortically blind participant. Additional left inferior parietal lobe activity was also observed in the neurologically intact group. Taken together, these results support a ventro-medial pathway that is specialized for processing the material properties of objects, and suggest that there are sub-regions within this pathway that subserve the processing of acoustically-derived information about material composition.

A double dissociation between action and perception in the context of visual illusions: opposite effects of real and illusory size

The idea that there are two distinct cortical visual pathways, a dorsal action stream and a ventral perception stream, is supported by neuroimaging and neuropsychological evidence. Yet there is an ongoing debate as to whether or not the action system is resistant to pictorial illusions in healthy participants. In the present study, we disentangled the effects of real and illusory object size on action and perception by pitting real size against illusory size. In our task, two objects that differed slightly in length were placed within a version of the Ponzo illusion. Even though participants erroneously perceived the physically longer object as the shorter one (or vice versa), their grasping was remarkably tuned to the real size difference between the objects. These results provide the first demonstration of a double dissociation between action and perception in the context of visual illusions and together with previous findings converge on the idea that visually guided action and visual perception make use of different metrics and frames of reference.

Independent Processing of Form, Colour, and Texture in Object Perception

Most investigations of object recognition have focused on the form rather than the material properties of objects. Nevertheless, knowledge of the material properties of an object (via its surface cues) can provide important information about that object's identity. In this study, we used Garner's speeded-classification task to explore whether or not the processing of form and the processing of surface properties are independent. In experiment 1, participants made length and width classifications in an initial form task. Participants were unable to ignore length while making width classifications, and were unable to ignore width while making length classifications. This suggests that the perception of length and the perception of width share common processing resources. In a subsequent task, we examined possible interactions between the processing of form and the processing of surface properties. In contrast to the findings with the form task, participants were able to ignore form while making surface-property classifications, and to ignore surface properties while making form classifications. This suggests that the form of objects and their surface properties are processed independently. In experiment 2, we went on to show that the two prominent surface-property dimensions of colour and texture can also be processed independently. In other words, participants were able to ignore colour while making texture classifications, and vice versa. Finally, in experiment 3, we examined the possibility that the stimuli and required responses that we used in experiment 2 were too categorical and thus not optimal for assessing whether or not colour and texture share common processing resources. Using a different stimulus set, participants were again able to ignore colour while making texture classifications, and vice versa. Taken together, these results provided convincing evidence that the separate ventral-stream brain regions identified for form, texture, and colour in a recent neuroimaging study (Cant and Goodale, 2007 Cerebral Cortex17 713–731) can indeed function independently.

Action Rules: Why the Visual Control of Reaching and Grasping is Not Always Influenced by Perceptual Illusions

It is generally accepted that vision first evolved for the distal control of movement and that perception or ‘representational’ vision emerged much later. Vision-for-action operates in real time and uses egocentric frames of reference and the real metrics of the world. Vision-for-perception can operate over longer time scales and is much more scene-based in its computations. These differences in the timing and metrics of the two systems have been examined in experiments that have looked at the way in which each system deals with visual illusions. Although controversial, the consensus is that actions such as grasping and reaching are often unaffected by high-level pictorial illusions, which by definition affect perception. However, recent experiments have shown that, for actions to escape the effects of such illusions, they must be highly practiced actions, preferably with the right hand, and must be directed in real time at visible targets. This latter finding suggests that some of the critical components of the encapsulated (bottom – up) systems that mediate the visual control of skilled reaching and grasping movements are lateralised to the left hemisphere.

Two visual systems re-viewed

The model proposed by the authors of two cortical systems providing 'vision for action' and 'vision for perception', respectively, owed much to the inspiration of Larry Weiskrantz. In the present article some essential concepts inherent in the model are summarized, and certain clarifications and refinements are offered. Some illustrations are given of recent experiments by ourselves and others that have prompted us to sharpen these concepts. Our explicit hope in writing our book in 1995 was to provide a theoretical framework that would stimulate research in the field. Conversely, well-designed empirical contributions conceived within the framework of the model are the only way for us to progress along the route towards a fully fleshed-out specification of its workings.

Motor force field learning influences visual processing of target motion

There are reciprocal connections between visual and motor areas of the cerebral cortex. Although recent studies have provided intriguing new insights, in comparison with volume of research on the visual control of movement, relatively little is known about how movement influences vision. The motor system is perfectly suited to learn about environmental forces. Does environmental force information, learned by the motor system, influence visual processing? Here, we show that learning to compensate for a force applied to the hand influenced how participants predicted target motion for interception. Ss trained in one of three constant force fields by making reaching movements while holding a robotic manipulandum. The robot applied forces in a null [null force field (NFF)], leftward [leftward force field (LFF)], or [rightward force field (RFF)] direction. Training was followed immediately with an interception task. The target accelerated from left to right and Ss's task was to stab it. When viewing time was optimal for prediction, the RFF group initiated their responses earlier and hit more targets, and the LFF group initiated their responses later and hit fewer targets, than the NFF group. In follow-up experiments, we show that motor learning is necessary, and we rule out the possibility that explicit force direction information drives how Ss altered their predictions of visual motion. Environmental force information, acquired by motor learning, influenced how the motion of nearby visual targets was predicted.

Practice makes perfect, but only with the right hand: sensitivity to perceptual illusions with awkward grasps decreases with practice in the right but not the left hand

It has been proposed that the visual mechanisms that control well-calibrated actions, such as picking up a small object with a precision grip, are neurally distinct from those that mediate our perception of the object. Thus, grip aperture in such situations has been shown to be remarkably insensitive to many size-contrast illusions. But most of us have practiced such movements hundreds, if not thousands of times. What about less familiar and unpracticed movements? Perhaps they would be less likely to be controlled by specialized visuomotor mechanisms and would therefore be more sensitive to size-contrast illusions. To test this idea, we asked right-handed subjects to pick up small objects using either a normal precision grasp (thumb and index finger) or an awkward grasp (thumb and ring finger), in the context of the Ponzo illusion. Even though this size-contrast illusion had no effect on the scaling of the precision grasp, it did have a significant effect on the scaling of the awkward grasp. Nevertheless, after three consecutive days of practice, even the awkward grasp became resistant to the illusion. In a follow-up experiment, we found that awkward grasps with the left hand (in right handers) did not benefit from practice and remained sensitive to the illusion. We conclude that the skilled target-directed movements are controlled by visual mechanisms that are quite distinct from those controlling unskilled movements, and that these specialized visuomotor mechanisms may be lateralized to the left hemisphere.

Left handedness does not extend to visually guided precision grasping

In the present study, we measured spontaneous hand preference in a "natural" grasping task. We asked right- and left-handed subjects to put a puzzle together or to create different LEGO models, as quickly and as accurately as possible, without any instruction about which hand to use. Their hand movements were videotaped and hand preference for grasping in ipsilateral and contralateral space was measured. Right handers showed a marked preference for their dominant hand when picking up objects; left handers, however, did not show this preference and instead used their right hand 50% of the time. Furthermore, compared to right handers, left handers used their non-dominant hand significantly more often to pick up objects in ipsilateral as well as contralateral space. Our results show that handedness in left handers does not extend to precision grasp and suggest that right handedness for visuomotor control may reflect a universal left-hemisphere specialization for this class of behaviour.

Functional reorganization in the adult brain

In this issue of Neuron, O'Shea et al. demonstrate that a network of cortical areas compensates for function when the left dorsal premotor area is disrupted by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and that these compensatory changes are not just functionally specific but are anatomically specific as well.

FMRI reveals a dissociation between grasping and perceiving the size of real 3D objects

BACKGROUND

Almost 15 years after its formulation, evidence for the neuro-functional dissociation between a dorsal action stream and a ventral perception stream in the human cerebral cortex is still based largely on neuropsychological case studies. To date, there is no unequivocal evidence for separate visual computations of object features for performance of goal-directed actions versus perceptual tasks in the neurologically intact human brain. We used functional magnetic resonance imaging to test explicitly whether or not brain areas mediating size computation for grasping are distinct from those mediating size computation for perception.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Subjects were presented with the same real graspable 3D objects and were required to perform a number of different tasks: grasping, reaching, size discrimination, pattern discrimination or passive viewing. As in prior studies, the anterior intraparietal area (AIP) in the dorsal stream was more active during grasping, when object size was relevant for planning the grasp, than during reaching, when object properties were irrelevant for movement planning (grasping>reaching). Activity in AIP showed no modulation, however, when size was computed in the context of a purely perceptual task (size = pattern discrimination). Conversely, the lateral occipital (LO) cortex in the ventral stream was modulated when size was computed for perception (size>pattern discrimination) but not for action (grasping = reaching).

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE

While areas in both the dorsal and ventral streams responded to the simple presentation of 3D objects (passive viewing), these areas were differentially activated depending on whether the task was grasping or perceptual discrimination, respectively. The demonstration of dual coding of an object for the purposes of action on the one hand and perception on the other in the same healthy brains offers a substantial contribution to the current debate about the nature of the neural coding that takes place in the dorsal and ventral streams.