September 2019
Volume 19, Issue 10
Open Access
Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting Abstract  |   September 2019
Why is contour integration impaired in schizophrenia? New insights from a cross-diagnostic parametrically varying behavioral task
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Brian P Keane
    Department of Psychiatry, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
    University Behavioral Health Care, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
    Center for Cognitive Science, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
  • Laura P Crespo
    Department of Psychiatry, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
    University Behavioral Health Care, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
  • Dillon T Smith
    Department of Psychiatry, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
    University Behavioral Health Care, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
  • Deanna M Barch
    Department of Psychology, Washington University in St. Louis
    Department of Psychiatry, Washington University in St. Louis
    Department of Radiology, Washington University in St. Louis
  • Michael W Cole
    Center for Molecular and Behavioral Neuroscience, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
  • Bart Krekelberg
    Center for Molecular and Behavioral Neuroscience, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
  • Brendon M Coughlin
    University Behavioral Health Care, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
  • Thomas V Papathomas
    Center for Cognitive Science, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
    Department of Biomedical Engineering, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
  • Attila J Farkas
    Center for Cognitive Science, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
  • Steven M Silverstein
    Department of Psychiatry, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
    University Behavioral Health Care, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
    Center for Cognitive Science, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
Journal of Vision September 2019, Vol.19, 241. doi:https://doi.org/10.1167/19.10.241
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Brian P Keane, Laura P Crespo, Dillon T Smith, Deanna M Barch, Michael W Cole, Bart Krekelberg, Brendon M Coughlin, Thomas V Papathomas, Attila J Farkas, Steven M Silverstein; Why is contour integration impaired in schizophrenia? New insights from a cross-diagnostic parametrically varying behavioral task. Journal of Vision 2019;19(10):241. doi: https://doi.org/10.1167/19.10.241.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Background. Schizophrenia patients poorly integrate disconnected oriented elements into cohesive contours and shapes; the impairment worsens as the stimulus is globally scaled down in size (d=1.7; Keane et al., 2016). What stimulus features drive this scaling effect and how specific is it to schizophrenia? Addressing this issue will yield clues for building behavioral tasks that flag current or impending psychosis; it will also clarify the visual mechanisms disturbed. Methods. We compared schizophrenia patients (SZ; N=5), bipolar disorder patients (BD; N=9) and well-matched healthy controls (N=7) on a task in which subjects sought to identify the screen quadrant location of an integrated eight-element circular target. Task difficulty was staircase controlled and depended on the number of noise elements co-presented with the target. There were 16 different conditions corresponding to the crossings of four parameters that would change with spatial scaling: (1) Gabor spatial frequency (6 or 12 cycles/deg), (2) Gabor width (Gaussian envelope SD of 2.4 or 4.8 arcmin), (3) target eccentricity (2.3 or 4.7 degrees), and (4) target radius (.74 or 1.5 deg). Results. Subject group interacted with spatial frequency, eccentricity, and Gabor width (four-way interaction,p< .01); it also interacted with eccentricity, radius, and spatial frequency (four-way interaction, p< .05). Comparing controls and BDs, there were no group differences or interactions (ps>.05). Comparing SZs to controls and to BDs, there was the same four-way interaction with spatial frequency, eccentricity, and Gabor width (both p< .05). More specifically, increasing Gabor width improved performance more for lower than for higher spatial frequency Gabors; increasing eccentricity accentuated this two-way interaction for controls and BDs but not for SZs. Conclusion. Potentially all aspects of spatial scaling jointly contribute to contour integration deficits in SZ perhaps because of inadequate sampling within parafoveal relative to peripheral retinotopic locations. These deficits appear to be SZ-specific and thus cannot be attributed to general psychopathology (e.g., anxiety, medication)

Acknowledgement: K01MH108783 
×
×

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.

×