May 2008
Volume 8, Issue 6
Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2008
V1 responses to different types of luminance histogram contrast
Author Affiliations
  • Cheryl Olman
    Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota, and Department of Radiology, University of Minnesota
  • Huseyin Boyaci
    Department of Psychology, Bilkent University, Ankara, Turkey
  • Fang Fang
    Department of Psychology, Peking University, Bejing, China
  • Katja Doerschner
    Department of Psychology, Bilkent University, Ankara, Turkey
Journal of Vision May 2008, Vol.8, 345. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Cheryl Olman, Huseyin Boyaci, Fang Fang, Katja Doerschner; V1 responses to different types of luminance histogram contrast. Journal of Vision 2008;8(6):345.

      Download citation file:

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

  • Supplements

It has been suggested that there exist neural mechanisms which are sensitive to luminance histogram skew, and that these mechanisms play a role in estimating surface properties (Motoyoshi, Nishida, Sharan & Adelson, 2007), or texture discrimination (Chubb, Landy, Econopouly, 2004). However, to the best of our knowledge, no systematic measurements of neural activity in early visual cortex in response to stimuli with skewed luminance histogram have been made to corroborate the existence of the postulated mechanisms.

Using fMRI, we measured BOLD signal in early visual cortex in response to noise images with either positive, negative or zero skewness of the luminance histogram.

Stimuli were circular (radius = 6.35 deg visual angle) random noise images whose histogram mean (M=128) and standard deviation (SD=43) were equated. Histogram contrast was manipulated by adjusting the third moment (skewness) of the luminance histogram to take on one of three values: positive (+1.4), negative (−1.4), or zero (0). Images were presented at a rate of 10Hz, in blocks of 24s separated by 24s presentation of a static image with uniform mean luminance (M=128, SD=0). The order of presentation during each scan (TR=2s) was: blank, positive skew, blank, negative skew, blank, zero skew. This sequence was repeated twice during each scan; there were a total of six scans per session. Observers fixated at the center of each stimulus, and performed a demanding fixation task during each scan.

The BOLD signal was analyzed within an independently determined ROI corresponding to an annulus located within the stimulus area (inner radius= 2 deg, outer radius 4 deg). On average V1 responses to noise images with positively and negatively skewed luminance histogram were significantly larger than those to images with zero skew. Furthermore, the V1 BOLD signal in response to images with negative contrast was larger than that to those with positive luminance histogram contrast.

Olman, C. Boyaci, H. Fang, F. Doerschner, K. (2008). V1 responses to different types of luminance histogram contrast [Abstract]. Journal of Vision, 8(6):345, 345a,, doi:10.1167/8.6.345. [CrossRef]
 This work was supported by NIH grant EY015261, and CMRR/Mayo NCC grant P30 NS057091. The 3T scanner at the University of Minnesota, Center for Magnetic Resonance Research is supported by BTRR P41 008079 and by the MIND Institute. Partial support has been provided by the Center for Cognitive Sciences, University of Minnesota.

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.