The cognitive neuroscience of vision

목차 (Table of Contents)

• CONTENTS
• List of Illustrations = ⅷ
• Series Editors' Preface = xvi
• Preface = xviii
• Acknowledgments = xx
• 1 Early Vision = 1
• 2 From Local to Global Image Representation = 29
• 3 The Problem of Visual Recognition = 65
• 4 Object Recognition = 82
• 5 Face Recognition = 115
• 6 Word Recognition = 147
• 7 Visual Attention = 174
• 8 Hemispatial Neglect = 206
• 9 Mental Imagery = 252
• 10 Visual Awareness = 290
• References = 336
• Index = 367
• Illustrations
• 1.1 Cross-section through the retina, showing three functionally distinct layers of cells : receptor cells, collector cells, and ganglion cells = 2
• 1.2 Absorption spectra of the three types of cones = 4
• 1.3 Schematic depiction of on-center／off-surround(left) and off-center／on-surround(right) receptive field structures = 5
• 1.4 Schematic depiction of the complementarity of M and P channels for spatial and temporal information = 7
• 1.5 Section through the LGN of one hemisphere showing its two magnocellular layers(with their visibly larger cell bodies) on the bottom and four parvocellular layers on top = 9
• 1.6 Correspondences between location of lesion within thevisual system and pattern of visual field defects. = 13
• 1.7 Pattern of metabolically active cells in the primary visual cortex of one hemisphere in a monkey who fixated the radial pattern shown above, demonstrating both retinotopy and cortical manification of the fovea = 15
• 1.8 Bar stimuli of different orientations(left) and the responses they evoke from a simple cell in primary visual cortex(right) = 16
• 1.9 Illustration of the idea that simple cells result form the feedforward convergence of a set of center-surround cells = 18
• 1.10 The orderly progression of orientation preference as a function of electrode position during and obliquepenetration of primary visual cortex = 21
• 1.11 Idealized depiction of the organization of orientation selectivity and ocular dominance in primary visual cortex = 22
• 1.12 Reconstruction of the actual relations between orientation columns(black) in primary visual cortex = 22
• 1.13 Layers of primary visual cortex, with distribution of cell types and afferent and efferent connections shown. = 24
• 1.14 Ocular dominance columns(left) and cytochrome oxidase blobs(middle) and their relation to one another(right) = 25
• 1.15 Original version of Livingstone and Hubel's hypothesis. = 27
• 2.1 Still life painted by an artist with acquired cerebral achromatiopsia, intended to convey his visual experience to others = 35
• 2.2 Location of V4 in the monkey brain. = 38
• 2.3 Location of the 'color center' of the human brain, identified by ERPs recorded from the cortical surface(grid) nd two PET studies(labeled C and L) = 39
• 2.4 Location of MT in the monkey brain = 42
• 2.5 The aperture problem : With just this local view of the moving line, we cannot tell if it is moving at one speed in a direction perpendicular to itself, or at a faster speed in a direction more aligned with itself = 43
• 2.6 Example of stimuli used in experiments distinguishing component and pattern motion perception. The plaid pattern on the right is perceived by us, and responded to by our pattern-selective neurons, as moving to the right, but component-selective neuro = 44
• 2.7 Example of stimuli used in experiments measuring direction discrimination. The smaller the proportion of coherently moving dots, the harder the discrimination = 46
• 2.8 Reconstruction of presumed critical lesion for producing motion blindness in a human = 49
• 2.9 Relative sizes of receptive fields for neurons in different parts of the visua system = 52
• 2.10 An example of illusory contours form in a ghostly triangle = 52
• 2.11 A single line passing throught two cells' receptive fields(top) results in more synchrony between the cells activity than a broken line(middle), which in turn produces more synchrony than two separately moving line segments(bottom), demonstrating = 54
• 2.12 Shape matching task = 57
• 2.13 An apperceptive agnosic read this pattern as 7415, demonstrating his extremely local perception of form = 59
• 2.14 Examples of stimuli designed to tax visual recognition and spatial learning in a study of unilateral right-hemishphere damaged patients = 62
• 2.15(a) Typical pair of patterns to be discriminated, impaired after inferotemporal lesions in monkeys.(bO Typical arrangement of a spatial landmark and food wells in a spatial learning experiment, impaired after posterior parietal lesions in monkeys = 63
• 3.1 Two views of a novel object used in experiments demonstrating viewpoint dependence in object recognition = 66
• 3.2 Example of a hybrid representation that is object-centered for size, position, and picture-plane orientation, and viewer-centered for depth orientation, with relations among different views encoded as a graph = 74
• 3.3 "Codons, " a type of contour-based primitiv proposed by Hoffman and Richards = 75
• 3.4 The "2½D sketch" of Marr, which uses surfacebased primitives = 76
• 3.5 Examples of three well-known sets of volume-based primitives = 77
• 3.6 A hierarchically organized representation of the Human body = 78
• 4.1 Sidney Harris's classic cartoon, which about sums up our understanding of the neural information processing performed between V4 and IT = 83
• 4.2 Inferotemporal cortex in the monkey brain = 84
• 4.3 Performance of IT-lesioned monkeys in a visual discrimination task = 86
• 4.4 The range of stimuli used to test the selectivity of a "hand cell'" in monkey IT cortex. the more different the stimulus shape from a monkey hand, the smaller the cell's response = 89
• 4.5 of stimulus patterns for which cells in IT cortex show selectivity = 90
• 4.6 the response strength of a shape selective cell as a function of shape similarity and as a function of stimulus size = 91
• 4.7 Copies of pictures made by an asociative visual agnosic who could not recognize the pictures, either before of after copying them = 95
• 4.8 More examples of the good-quality copies made by associative visual agnosics who do not recognize their subject matter = 96
• 4.9 Examples of photographs used to test for a perceptual categorization deficit = 100
• 4.10 Activation maxima from 17 neuroimaging studies of visual recognition = 104
• 4.11 Maxima subdivided into those derived from subtractions between passive object viewing and passive baseline tasks, and those derived from subtractions between active object recognition tasks and corresponding active baseline tasks = 105
• 4.12 Maxima subdivided into those derived from visual recognition of objects, faces, and printed words = 106
• 5.1 We are so proficient at face rocognition that it may be hard to appreciate shat radically different images fall on our retinas when a single face changes its expresion or orientation = 116
• 5.2 Some well-known faces = 118
• 5.3 Responses ofa typical face cell to a variety of stumuli = 120
• 5.4 Examples of stumuli from an experiment contrasting face and object recoignition in a prosopagnosic = 124
• 5.5 Two types of relations between a specialized face recognition system and an object recognition system = 132
• 5.6 An agnosic patient with preserved face recognition saw this painting by archimbaldo as a face, pure and simple = 134
• 5.7 Examples of stimuli from an experiment contrasting the availability of part information for face and house recognition = 137
• 5.8 The anatomy of a Greeble = 144
• 5.9 Examples of Greebles and their family, gende, and individual differences = 145
• 6.1 Function relating word length(in letters) to reading time(in seconds) for a pure alexic patient = 151
• 6.2 Examples of clear(unmasked) and degraded(masked) word stimuli used to assess the causal role of visual impairment in pure alexia = 157
• 6.3 Reading time as a function of word length and visual quality for a pure alexic = 158
• 6.4 Illustration of the problem of interference when multiple shapes are represented in a distributed manner and the aviodance of this problem by adoptinglocal representation = 159
• 6.5 Part of the letter and word representation network of the interactive Activation and Competition model = 162
• 6.6 Representations of the upper- and lower-case forms of three letters, which developed spontaneouly in a Hebbian network exposed to upper- and lower-case words = 170
• 7.1 ERP evidence concerning the timecourse and location of attentional effects in vision = 181
• 7.2 An early PET experiment, showing the two conditions that were subtracted with the intention of isolating spatial attention effects invision = 183
• 7.3 Example of a trial from a PET experiment on attention to different dimensions of vision = 185
• 7.4 Typical displays, showing location to which attention was cued, and resultant neural activity in a classic study of attentional effects on individual neurons in monkeyarea V4 = 188
• 7.5 Typical sequence of stimuli, and schematic represen of neural activity, in an experiment on attention to object properties = 190
• 7.6 Areas citical for spatial attention in the human and monkey brains = 198
• 7.7 Examples of procedure and results from a classic study of space representation in Area 7a of the parietal lobe = 200
• 7.8 Three conditions, and representative results from a neuron in area LIP, demonstrating nonretinotopic coding of location = 202
• 7.9 Demonstration of the spatially coincient visual and tactile receptive fields ofneurons in LIP = 204
• 8.1 The line cancellation performance of a patient with left neglect = 209
• 8.2 Two attemptsto copy simple figures by a patient with left neglect = 210
• 8.3 Reconstructed lesions of eight patients with severe neglect, showing the location of maximal overlap in the inferior posterior parietal region = 210
• 8.4 A demonstration of the dissociability of local and global form informatiion = 213
• 8.5 A map of the Piazza del Duomo in Milan, showing the two locations at which neglect patients wire to imagine themselves standing, and the locations of the landmarksvisualized from memory = 216
• 8.6 A very simple model of spatial attention = 218
• 8.7 Manipulations of patient position used to disentanglethe contributions of two nonretinotopic frames of reference used in the allocation of spatial attention = 224