Interactions between orientation and contrast modulations suggest limited cross-cue linkage

Andrew J. Schofield*, Timothy A. Yates

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Recent studies of texture segmentation and second-order vision have proposed very similar models for the detection of orientation modulation and contrast modulation (OM and CM). From the similarity of the models it is tempting to assume that the two cues might be processed by a single generalised texture mechanism; however, recent results (Kingdom et al, 2003 Visual Neuroscience 2 65-76) have suggested that these cues are detected independently, or at least in a mechanism that is able to maintain an apparent independence between the cues. We tested new combinations of OM and CM and found that CM at 0.4 cycle deg-1 facilitates the detection of OM at 0.2 cycle deg -1 when the peaks of contrast align with the extremes of orientation. There is also some evidence of weak facilitation of CM by OM under the same conditions. Further, this facilitation can be predicted by filter-rectify-filter channels optimised for the detection of each cue, adding weight to the argument that texture cues are processed in a single generalised mechanism that nonetheless achieves cue independence or near-independence in many circumstances. We also found that the amount of suprathreshold masking produced by an orientation cue depends on the overall percept formed by that cue.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)769-792
Number of pages24
Issue number7
Publication statusPublished - 1 Sept 2005


Dive into the research topics of 'Interactions between orientation and contrast modulations suggest limited cross-cue linkage'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this