The knowledge used in vision and where it comes from
Open accessAbstract
Knowledge is often thought to be something brought from outside to act upon the visual messages received from the eye in a ‘top–down’ fashion, but this is a misleadingly narrow view. First, the visual system is a multilevel heterarchy with connections acting in all directions so it has no ‘top’; and second, knowledge is provided through innately determined structure and by analysis of the redundancy in sensory messages themselves, as well as from outside. This paper gives evidence about mechanisms analysing sensory redundancy in biological vision. Automatic gain controls for luminance and contrast depend upon feedback from the input, and there are strong indications that the autocorrelation function, and other associations between input variables, affect the contrast sensitivity function and our subjective experience of the world. The associative structure of sensory messages can provide much knowledge about the world we live in, and neural mechanisms that discount established associative structure in the input messages by recoding them can improve survival by making new structure more easily detectable. These mechanisms may be responsible for illusions, such as those produced by a concave face–mask, that are classically attributed to top–down influences.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Some authors argue that certain visual illusions rely on some form of top-down processing, a claim that has been contested.
“some authors argue that certain illusions rely on some form of top-down processing (40,41), a claim that has been contested (42,43).”
From Shift toward prior knowledge confers a perceptual advantage in early psychosis and psychosis-prone healthy individuals (2015) · cites this paper as [42]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 29 · Cited by 54
- Authors
- Barlow, H. B.
- Affiliations
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Barlow, Horace B.
- Venue
- Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences
- Publisher
- The Royal Society
- Published
- 1997-08-29
- Volume
- 352
- Issue
- 1358
- Pages
- 1141-1147
- ISSN
- 0962-8436 (ISSN-L)
- 1471-2970
- PMC
- PMC1692015
- OpenAlex
- W2116993809
- Cited by
- 54
- References
- 29
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 2.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Multisensory perception and integration
- Keywords
- visual perception, top-down processing, sensory redundancy, autocorrelation function, contrast sensitivity function, automatic gain control, feedback mechanisms, associative structures, optical illusions
- MeSH terms
- Cognition, Humans, Visual Perception
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review