Cited by 126Visual perception and processing mechanismsVisual Attention and Saliency DetectionPhilosophy and Theoretical Science

Continuous flash suppression modulates cortical activity in early visual cortex

Open access
Yuval-Greenberg, S., Heeger, D. J.·2013·Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

A salient visual stimulus can be rendered invisible by presenting it to one eye while flashing a mask to the other eye. This procedure, called continuous flash suppression (CFS), has been proposed as an ideal way of studying awareness as it can make a stimulus imperceptible for extended periods of time. Previous studies have reported robust suppression of cortical activity in higher visual areas during CFS, but the role of primary visual cortex (V1) is still controversial. In this study, we resolve this controversy on the role of V1 in CFS and also begin characterizing the computational processes underlying CFS. Early visual cortical activity was measured with functional magnetic resonance imaging while human subjects viewed stimuli composed of target and mask, presented to the same or different eyes. Functional MRI responses in early visual cortex were smaller when target and mask were in different eyes compared with the same eye, not only for the lowest contrast target rendered invisible by CFS, but also for higher contrast targets, which were visible even when presented to the eye opposite the mask. We infer that CFS is based on modulating the gain of neural responses, akin to reducing target contrast.

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.4612-12.2013

Cites

63 of 63 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?

  • Perception enhances the BOLD response within V1 for specific experimental designs (e.g., flash suppression of perception).

    “In fact, perception was found to enhance the BOLD response within V1 for specific experimental designs (e.g., flash suppression of perception) (Yuval-Greenberg and Heeger, 2013).”

    From Perception is associated with the brain’s metabolic response to sensory stimulation (2022) · cites this paper as Yuval-Greenberg and Heeger, 2013

    The Results (V1 responses during CFS; page unavailable) report larger V1 fMRI responses for visible than invisible targets. But the Discussion (Previous CFS imaging studies; page unavailable) explicitly makes no claim about the relation between V1 activity and awareness. The finding supports a difference between the experimental conditions, not the stronger claim that perception itself enhances the BOLD response. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Dale AM 1999 Optimal experimental design for event-related fMRI Hum Brain Mapp 8 109 114 10524601 PMC6873302
  2. Nestares O Heeger DJ 2000 Robust multiresolution alignment of MRI brain volumes Magn Reson Med 43 705 715 10800036

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yuval-Greenberg, S., & Heeger, D. J.
Affiliations
New York University (US)
Venue
Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2013-06-05
Volume
33
Issue
23
Pages
9635-9643
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W1977345281
Cited by
126
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 1
FWCI
6.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Eye Institute (R01EY016752)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
Keywords
continuous flash suppression, primary visual cortex, visual awareness, visual masking, interocular suppression, target contrast, visual perception
MeSH terms
Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Photic Stimulation, Psychomotor Performance, Time Factors, Visual Cortex, 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