Cited by 49Face Recognition and PerceptionVisual perception and processing mechanismsNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Face Repetition Probability Does Not Affect Repetition Suppression in Macaque Inferotemporal Cortex

Open access
Vinken, Kasper, Op de Beeck, Hans P., Vogels, Rufin·2018·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Repetition suppression, which refers to reduced neural activity for repeated stimuli, is typically explained by bottom-up or local adaptation mechanisms. However, recent theories have emphasized the role of top-down processes, suggesting that this response reduction reflects the fulfillment of perceptual expectations. To support this, an influential human fMRI study showed that the magnitude of suppression is modulated by the probability of a repetition. No such repetition probability effect was found in macaque inferior temporal (IT) cortex for spiking activity despite the presence of repetition suppression. Contrary to the human fMRI studies that showed an effect of repetition probability, the macaque single-unit study used a large variety of unfamiliar stimuli and the monkeys were not required to attend the stimuli. Here, as in the human fMRI studies, we used faces as stimuli and made the monkeys attend to the stimulus content. We simultaneously recorded spiking activity and local field potentials (LFPs) in the middle lateral face patch (ML) of one monkey (male) and a face-responsive region of another (female). Although we observed significant repetition suppression of spiking activity and high gamma-band LFPs in both animals, there were no effects of repetition probability even when repetitions were task relevant and repetition probability affected behavioral decisions. In conclusion, despite the use of face stimuli and a stimulus-related task, no neural signature of repetition probability was present for faces in a face responsive patch of macaque IT. This further challenges a general perceptual expectation account of repetition suppression. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Repetition suppression is a reduced brain activity for repeated stimuli commonly observed across species. In the predictive coding framework, such suppression is thought to reflect fulfilled perceptual expectations. Although this hypothesis is supported by several human fMRI studies reporting an effect of repetition probability on repetition suppression, this could not be replicated in single-cell recordings in monkey inferior temporal (IT) cortex. Subsequent studies narrowed down the conditions for the effect to requiring attention and being limited to particular stimulus categories such as faces. Here, we show that, even under these conditions, repetition suppression in monkey IT neurons is still unaffected by repetition probability, even in a task with a behavioral effect, challenging the perceptual expectation account of repetition suppression.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1523/jneurosci.0462-18.2018

Cites

71 of 71 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Vinken et al. failed to observe any evidence of an effect of repetition probability on RS in single-unit or multiunit activity in macaque ML, even when repetitions were task-relevant and repetition probability affected behavior.

    “To address these issues, Vinken et al. 72 recorded neural activity in response to face stimuli in the middle lateral face patch (ML), a macaque homolog of FFA. Once again, they failed to observe any evidence of an effect of repetition probability on RS in single‐unit or multiunit activity, even when the repetitions were task‐relevant and repetition probability was found to affect the monkeys'”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vinken, K., Op de Beeck, H. P., & Vogels, R.
Affiliations
KU Leuven (BE)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2018-07-20
Volume
38
Issue
34
Pages
7492-7504
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2883872623
Cited by
49
References
71
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 1
FWCI
3.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lirias (KU Leuven) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (G058212N, G.00007.12-Odysseus, G.00007.12, G088916N)
  • KU Leuven (PDM/17/186)
  • Vlaamse regering (G.00007.12, G088916N)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
repetition suppression, inferior temporal cortex, face processing, predictive coding, perceptual expectations, top-down modulation, local field potentials, gamma oscillations, single-unit activity, macaque, attention
MeSH terms
Action Potentials, Adaptation, Physiological, Animals, Brain Mapping, Face, Female, Fixation, Ocular, Macaca mulatta, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Probability, Temporal Lobe, Visual Perception, Patch-Clamp Techniques, Anticipation, Psychological

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