July 2013
Volume 13, Issue 9
Free
Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting Abstract  |   July 2013
Dissociating stimulus visibility and fear related processing using metacontrast masking
Author Affiliations
  • Philipp Hintze
    Institute for Biomagnetism and Biosignalanalysis, University of Muenster
  • Markus Junghöfer
    Institute for Biomagnetism and Biosignalanalysis, University of Muenster
  • Maximilian Bruchmann
    Institute for Biomagnetism and Biosignalanalysis, University of Muenster
Journal of Vision July 2013, Vol.13, 905. doi:10.1167/13.9.905
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Philipp Hintze, Markus Junghöfer, Maximilian Bruchmann; Dissociating stimulus visibility and fear related processing using metacontrast masking. Journal of Vision 2013;13(9):905. doi: 10.1167/13.9.905.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

In our study, we took a correlational approach to disentangle the relation between stimulus awareness and neurophysiological markers of fear related processing, using metacontrast masking to manipulate stimulus visibility in consecutive steps (by increasing the SOA between target and mask). The function of visibility in metacontrast masking is U-shaped with high visibility at low SOAs, a decline in visibility with increasing SOA to a minimum at around 50ms, followed by a gradual increase in visibility at SOAs of 100ms and longer. The descending branch of this U-shaped masking function up to its minimum allows for a double dissociation between stimulus visibility and the time of uninterfered target processing of the target stimulus: Visibility decreases while the time of uninterfered target processing increases with increasing SOA. One of two physically identical target gratings was paired with an aversive startle burst in a trace conditioning protocol. We compared the differences in the visual evoked potentials of conditioned and neutral stimuli at three SOAs on the descending branch of the masking function. We find that, while detectability and discriminability of the target stimuli decrease with increasing SOA as expected, the difference in the visual evoked potentials increases with increasing SOA. This double dissociation between stimulus visibility and fear related processing is the soundest possible evidence for the hypothesis that fear conditioning is not depending on stimulus awareness. As metacontrast masking is assumed to be caused by feed-forward signals of the mask interfering with recurrent activity of the target, we assume affective processing to be strongly reliant on feed-forward information: The longer the feed-forward signal of the target is available without interfering feed-forward signals of the mask, the stronger aversively conditioned and neutral stimuli diverge.

Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2013

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×