Neuroscience

Articles and news from the latest research reports.

371 notes

Brain fills gaps to produce a likely picture
Researchers at Radboud University use visual illusions to demonstrate to what extent the brain interprets visual signals. They were surprised to discover that active interpretation occurs early on in signal processing. In other words, we see not only with our eyes, but with our brain, too. Current Biology is publishing these results in the July issue.
The results obtained by the Radboud University researchers are illustrated, for example, by the visual illusion on the left: we see a triangle that in fact is not there. The triangle is only suggested because of the way the ‘Pac-Man’ shapes are positioned; there appears to be a light-grey triangle on top of three black circles.
Seen in the fMRIHow does the brain do that? That was the question Peter Kok and Floris de Lange, from the Donders Institute at Radboud University in Nijmegen, asked themselves. Using fMRI, they discovered that the triangle – although non-existent – activates the primary visual brain cortex. This is the first area in the cortex to deal with a signal from the eyes.
The primary visual brain cortex is normally regarded as the area where eye signals are merely processed, but that has now been refuted by the results Kok and De Lange obtained.
Active interpretationRecent theories assume that the brain does not simply process or filter external information, but actively interprets it. In the example described above, the brain decides it is more likely that a triangle would be on top of black circles than that three such circles, each with a bite taken out, would by coincidence point in a particular direction. After all, when we look around, we see triangles and circles more often than Pac-Man shapes.
Furthermore, objects very often lie on top of other things; just think of the books and piles of paper on your desk. The imaginary triangle is a feasible explanation for the bites taken out of the circles; the brain ‘understands’ they are ‘merely’ partly covered black circles.
The unexpected requires more processingKok and De Lange also noticed that whenever the Pac-Man shapes do not form a triangle, more brain activity is required. In the above image on the right, we see that the three Pac-Man shapes ‘underneath’ the triangle cause little brain activity (coloured blue), but the separate Pac-Man on the right causes more activity. This also fits in with the theory that perception is a question of interpretation: if something is easy to explain, less brain activity is needed to process that information, compared to when something is unexpected or difficult to account for – as in the adjacent diagram.

Brain fills gaps to produce a likely picture

Researchers at Radboud University use visual illusions to demonstrate to what extent the brain interprets visual signals. They were surprised to discover that active interpretation occurs early on in signal processing. In other words, we see not only with our eyes, but with our brain, too. Current Biology is publishing these results in the July issue.

The results obtained by the Radboud University researchers are illustrated, for example, by the visual illusion on the left: we see a triangle that in fact is not there. The triangle is only suggested because of the way the ‘Pac-Man’ shapes are positioned; there appears to be a light-grey triangle on top of three black circles.

Seen in the fMRI
How does the brain do that? That was the question Peter Kok and Floris de Lange, from the Donders Institute at Radboud University in Nijmegen, asked themselves. Using fMRI, they discovered that the triangle – although non-existent – activates the primary visual brain cortex. This is the first area in the cortex to deal with a signal from the eyes.

The primary visual brain cortex is normally regarded as the area where eye signals are merely processed, but that has now been refuted by the results Kok and De Lange obtained.

Active interpretation
Recent theories assume that the brain does not simply process or filter external information, but actively interprets it. In the example described above, the brain decides it is more likely that a triangle would be on top of black circles than that three such circles, each with a bite taken out, would by coincidence point in a particular direction. After all, when we look around, we see triangles and circles more often than Pac-Man shapes.

Furthermore, objects very often lie on top of other things; just think of the books and piles of paper on your desk. The imaginary triangle is a feasible explanation for the bites taken out of the circles; the brain ‘understands’ they are ‘merely’ partly covered black circles.

The unexpected requires more processing
Kok and De Lange also noticed that whenever the Pac-Man shapes do not form a triangle, more brain activity is required. In the above image on the right, we see that the three Pac-Man shapes ‘underneath’ the triangle cause little brain activity (coloured blue), but the separate Pac-Man on the right causes more activity. This also fits in with the theory that perception is a question of interpretation: if something is easy to explain, less brain activity is needed to process that information, compared to when something is unexpected or difficult to account for – as in the adjacent diagram.

Filed under visual illusions visual cortex brain activity neuroimaging shape perception neuroscience science

  1. arianaiscurlyfri reblogged this from tumbsup-blr
  2. abbyliesbeth reblogged this from shuya-aragaki
  3. kyokotsukuyomi reblogged this from shuya-aragaki
  4. chickenmunslounge reblogged this from shuya-aragaki
  5. shuya-aragaki reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
  6. runningaroundintheabyss reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
  7. asides-and-analecta reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
  8. durzio reblogged this from alec-c-c-combo-breaker
  9. thisisjustawful reblogged this from alec-c-c-combo-breaker
  10. alec-c-c-combo-breaker reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
  11. s0ph1sticated reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
  12. astray-thought reblogged this from vanesa
  13. archdukewalrus reblogged this from vanesa
  14. vanesa reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
  15. black-geek-supremacy reblogged this from starsaremymuse
  16. starsaremymuse reblogged this from mj-the-scientist
  17. andromedahotzone reblogged this from mj-the-scientist
  18. mj-the-scientist reblogged this from the-science-of-time
  19. deprecates reblogged this from thenewenlightenmentage
  20. cosmic-microwave-background reblogged this from thenewenlightenmentage
  21. gurakruor reblogged this from fatalflyinguillotine
  22. fatalflyinguillotine reblogged this from thenewenlightenmentage
  23. ute-to-be reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
  24. puddingnanodesu reblogged this from faolinnfaustulusfaun
  25. faolinnfaustulusfaun reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
  26. totorista reblogged this from sinnephi
  27. las-erquest reblogged this from easygoingskeleton
  28. i-wuv-kaz reblogged this from sinnephi
  29. apdee reblogged this from sinnephi
  30. sinnephi reblogged this from pleasekeeplearning
  31. astrid42 reblogged this from thenewenlightenmentage
  32. puraaneta reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
  33. the-cosmic-coffee reblogged this from thenewenlightenmentage
  34. komorebi-paintbrush reblogged this from neurosciencestuff
free counters