The ability to interact appropriately with objects in the environment requires the observer to recognize the specific target objects. One way we do this is by being able to visually distinguish the shape of the target from other nontarget shapes. Being able to determine the shape of an object is therefore a critical step in object recognition and this often entails delineating the two-dimensional extent, or boundary, of an object. The position of a boundary in noise can be determined in numerous ways. If the boundary is defined by a contrast in luminance then this process can begin with the visual system detecting local elements of oriented luminance information and combining them to form the bounding contour (Loffler,
2008; Wilson & Wilkinson,
2015). Salience of such a boundary in noise is enhanced by means of early stages of visual processing highlighting and facilitating the detection of contour fragments that continue smoothly across a visual scene (Field, Hayes, & Hess,
1993; Kapadia, Westheimer, & Gilbert,
2000; Li & Gilbert,
2002) and human functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies have revealed stronger responses to contours containing collinear elements than randomly oriented elements (Altmann, Bülthoff, & Kourtzi,
2003). Although there is some evidence that familiar contours are more salient than unfamiliar (Nygård, Sassi, & Wagemans,
2011), the process described above is often termed
contour extraction as it involves delineating the boundary rather than analysis of the shape of the boundary. It is assumed in this study that it is once the boundary has been extracted from its context that analysis of the shape of the object is then possible. The enhancement of the salience of collinear elements has been modeled as being due to excitatory long range lateral connections between neurons with similar orientation preference (Field et al.,
1993). As well as accounting for the enhanced salience of collinear paths, this mechanism can also explain the salience in noise of smooth paths of Gabor patches consistently aligned perpendicular to the path (Bex, Simmers, & Dakin,
2001; Ledgeway, Hess, & Geisler,
2005; Marotti, Pavan, & Cascoa,
2012). Such paths do not provide a luminance cue at the boundary, but if the gain of the neurons responsible for the detection of the elements of the path is enhanced relative to a background then such a path might become visible because of exaggerated sensitivity to the luminance-contrast properties of the boundary. Once a path is rendered visible against its context then analysis of the shape of the path can proceed. Marotti et al. (
2012) framed this observation in terms of Gestalt principles of grouping. Both paths composed of collinear patches (snakes) and parallel patches (ladders), are enhanced in salience when presented in noise due to their similarity in orientation, but the salience of collinear paths are also enhanced by good continuation. Significantly, Marotti et al. (
2012) reported that the salience of a ladder was enhanced slightly if the phases of the patches were randomized. They argued that this might be due to a reduction in inhibitory crowding interactions between parallel elements when the contrast difference between adjacent elements was randomized and concluded that the salience of snakes and ladders was mediated by a balance between excitatory and inhibitory lateral interactions at an early level of analysis in the visual system. Under such a system, the salience of a path would depend upon a complex of lateral interactions, although it is probable that the excitatory lateral interactions of collinear elements would predominate. In a recent study, Wilder, Feldman, and Singh (
2016) used information theoretic arguments to model contour detection in noise as a decision problem. Observers were required to report, in a two-interval forced choice task, the interval that contained a path. It was found that as complexity of the path increased, the ability to detect the path decreased. In their model, complexity is a strong function of the curvature of the path, but the distribution of the complexity on the path was shown to be unimportant. This indicates that observers were not performing the task by searching for straight-line segments and suggests that the salience of the path in noise must be considered holistically. Reconciliation of this information theoretic model with the association field model (Field et al.,
1993) will, however, require more work. For our purposes, although we recognize that shape inevitably influences the salience of paths in noise, we suggest that the analysis of the shape of the path occurs after it is detected.