Abstract
The investigation of perceptual and cognitive functions with non-invasive brain imaging methods critically depends on the careful selection of stimuli for use in experiments. For example, it must be verified that any observed effects follow from the parameter of interest (e.g. semantic category) rather than other low-level physical features (e.g. luminance, or spectral properties). Otherwise, interpretation of results is confounded. Often, researchers circumvent this issue by including additional control conditions or tasks, both of which are flawed and also prolong experiments. Here, we present some new approaches for controlling classes of stimuli intended for use in cognitive neuroscience, however these methods can be readily extrapolated to other applications and stimulus modalities. Our approach is comprised of two levels. The first level aims at equalizing individual stimuli in terms of their mean luminance. Each data point in the stimulus is adjusted to a standardized value based on a standard value across the stimulus battery. The second level analyzes two populations of stimuli along their spectral properties (i.e. spatial frequency) using a dissimilarity metric that equals the root mean square of the distance between two populations of objects as a function of spatial frequency along x- and y-dimensions of the image. Randomized permutations are used to obtain a minimal value between the populations to minimize, in a completely data-driven manner, the spectral differences between image sets. While another paper in this issue applies these methods in the case of acoustic stimuli (Aeschlimann et al., Brain Topogr 2008), we illustrate this approach here in detail for complex visual stimuli.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Thorpe SJ, Fize D, Marlot C. Speed of processing in the human visual system. Nature 1996;381:520–2.
Mouchetant-Rostaing Y, Giard MH, Bentin S, Aguera PE, Pernier J. Neurophysiological correlates of face gender processing in humans. Eur J Neurosci 2000;12:303–10.
VanRullen R, Thorpe SJ. The time course of visual processing: from early perception to decision-making. J Cogn Neurosci 2001;13:454–61.
Carmel D, Bentin S. Domain specificity versus expertise: factors influencing distinct processing of faces. Cognition 2002;83:1–29.
Goffaux V, Gauthier I, Rossion B. Spatial scale contribution to early visual differences between face and object processing. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res 2003;16:416–24.
Delorme A, Rousselet GA, Mace MJ, Fabre-Thorpe M. Interaction of top-down and bottom-up processing in the fast visual analysis of natural scenes. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res 2004;19:103–13.
Michel CM, Seeck M, Murray MM. The speed of visual cognition. Suppl Clin Neurophysiol 2004;57:617–27.
Lewis JW, Brefczynski JA, Phinney RE, Janik JJ, DeYoe EA. Distinct cortical pathways for processing tool versus animal sounds. J Neurosci 2005;25:5148–58.
Murray MM, Camen C, Gonzalez Andino SL, Bovet P, Clarke S. Rapid brain discrimination of sounds of objects. J Neurosci 2006;26:1293–302.
Harel A, Ullman S, Epshtein B, Bentin S. Mutual information of image fragments predicts categorization in humans: electrophysiological and behavioral evidence. Vision Res 2007;47: 2010–20.
Delplanque S, N’diaye K, Scherer K, Grandjean D. Spatial frequencies or emotional effects? A systematic measure of spatial frequencies for IAPS pictures by a discrete wavelet analysis. J␣Neurosci Methods 2007;165:144–50.
Lang PJ, Bradley MM, Cuthbert BN. International affective picture system (IAPS): affective ratings of pictures and instruction manual. Technical Report A-6. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida; 2005.
Murray MM, Brunet D, Michel CM. Topographic ERP analyses: a step-by-step tutorial review. Brain Topogr 2008. doi:10.1007/s10548-008-0054-5.
Pizzagalli D, Regard M, Lehmann D. Rapid emotional face processing in the human right and left brain hemispheres: an ERP study. Neuroreport 1999;10:2691–88.
Pourtois G, Dan ES, Grandjean D, Sander D, Vuilleumier P. Enhanced extrastriate visual response to bandpass spatial frequency filtered fearful faces: time course and topographic evoked-potentials mapping. Hum Brain Mapp 2005;26:65–79.
Itier RJ, Taylor MJ. N170 or N1? Spatiotemporal differences between object and face processing using ERPs. Cereb Cortex 2004;14:132–42.
Thierry G, Martin CD, Downing P, Pegna AJ. Controlling for interstimulus perceptual variance abolishes N170 face selectivity. Nat Neurosci 2007;10:505–11.
Bentin S, Taylor MJ, Rousselet GA, Itier RJ, Caldara R, Schyns PG, Jacques C, Rossion B. Controlling interstimulus perceptual variance does not abolish N170 face sensitivity. Nat Neurosci 2007;10:801–2.
Johannes S, Münte TF, Heinze HJ, Mangun GR. Luminance and spatial attention effects on early visual processing. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res 1995;2:189–205.
McCourt ME, Foxe JJ. Brightening prospects for early cortical coding of perceived luminance: a high-density electrical mapping study. Neuroreport 2004;15:49–56.
Butler PD Martinez A, Foxe JJ, Kim D, Zemon V, Silipo G, Mahoney J, Shpaner M, Jalbrzikowski M, Javitt DC. Subcortical visual dysfunction in schizophrenia drives secondary cortical impairments. Brain 2007;130:417–30.
Doniger GM, Foxe JJ, Murray MM, Higgins BA, Snodgrass JG, Schroeder CE, Javitt DC. Activation timecourse of ventral visual stream object-recognition areas: high density electrical mapping of perceptual closure processes. J Cogn Neurosci 2000;12:615–21.
Rossion B, Jacques C. Does physical interstimulus variance account for early electrophysiological face sensitive responses in the human brain? Ten lessons on the N170. Neuroimage 2007. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.10.011.
Aeschlimann M, Knebel J-F, Murray MM, Clarke S. Emotional pre-eminence of human vocalizations. Brain Topogr 2008. doi:10.1007/s10548-008-0051-8
Wyszecki G, Stiles WS. Color science: concepts and methods, quantitative data and formulae. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1982.
Pascal B, Huygens C. Treaty of mathematics “De rationiciis in ludo aleae”. 1657.
Oppenheim AV, Lim JS. The importance of phase in signals. Proc IEEE 1981;69:529–41.
Vuilleumier P, Armony JL, Driver J, Dolan RJ. Distinct spatial frequency sensitivities for processing faces and emotional expressions. Nat Neurosci 2003;6:624–31.
Nasanen R. Spatial frequency bandwidth used in the recognition of facial images. Vis Res 1999;39:3824–33.
Dakin SC, Hess RF, Ledgeway T, Achtman RL. What causes non-monotonic tuning of fMRI response to noisy images? Curr Biol 2002;12:R476–7.
Lehmann D, Skrandies W. Reference-free identification of components of checkerboard-evoked multichannel potential fields. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1980;48:609–21.
Skrandies W. EEG/EP: new techniques. Brain Topogr 1993;5: 347–50.
Acknowledgments
Financial support has been provided by the Leenaards Foundation (2005 Prize for the Promotion of Scientific Research to MMM). Researchers interested in obtaining the MatLab code for the procedures should either contact Jean-François Knebel or Micah Murray.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
J.-F. Knebel and U. Toepel contributed equally to this report.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Knebel, JF., Toepel, U., Hudry, J. et al. Generating Controlled Image Sets in Cognitive Neuroscience Research. Brain Topogr 20, 284–289 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10548-008-0046-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10548-008-0046-5