Cultural advice

The Australian National University acknowledges, celebrates and pays our respects to the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people of the Canberra region and to all First Nations Australians on whose traditional lands we meet and work, and whose cultures are among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are advised that ANU Library collections may include images, names, voices, and other representations of deceased persons.

Material in the collection may contain terms, language or views that reflect the period in which the item was created and may be considered inappropriate today.

Differences in perceptual masking between humans and rats

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

Authors

Dell, Katrina Louise
Arabzadeh, Ehsan
Price, Nicholas

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Wiley

Abstract

Introduction: The perception of a target stimulus can be impaired by a subsequent mask stimulus, even if they do not overlap temporally or spatially. This “backward masking” is commonly used to modulate a subject's awareness of a target and to char‐ acterize the temporal dynamics of vision. Masking is most apparent with brief, low‐ contrast targets, making detection difficult even in the absence of a mask. Although necessary to investigate the underlying neural mechanisms, evaluating masking phe‐ nomena in animal models is particularly challenging, as the task structure and critical stimulus features to be attended must be learned incrementally through rewards and feedback. Despite the increasing popularity of rodents in vision research, it is unclear if they are susceptible to masking illusions. Methods: We characterized how spatially surrounding masks affected the detection of sine‐wave grating targets. Results: In humans (n = 5) and rats (n = 7), target detection improved with contrast and was reduced by the presence of a mask. After controlling for biases to respond induced by the presence of the mask, a clear reduction in detectability was caused by masks. This reduction was evident when data were averaged across all animals, but was only individually significant in three animals. Conclusions: While perceptual masking occurs in rats, it may be difficult to observe consistently in individual animals because the complexity of the requisite task pushes the limits of their behavioral capabilities. We suggest methods to ensure that mask‐ ing, and similarly subtle effects, can be reliably characterized in future experiments.

Description

Citation

Source

Brain and Behavior

Book Title

Entity type

Access Statement

Open Access

License Rights

Creative Commons Attribution License

Restricted until