• Experience-dependent Changes i...

*Result*: Experience-dependent Changes in the Visual Processing of Letters: Evidence from Electroencephalography Decoding.

Title:
Experience-dependent Changes in the Visual Processing of Letters: Evidence from Electroencephalography Decoding.
Authors:
Winsler K; University of California, Davis., Luck SJ; University of California, Davis.
Source:
Journal of cognitive neuroscience [J Cogn Neurosci] 2026 Feb 01; Vol. 38 (2), pp. 226-241.
Publication Type:
Journal Article
Language:
English
Journal Info:
Publisher: Published by the MIT Press with the Cognitive Neuroscience Institute Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 8910747 Publication Model: Print Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1530-8898 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 0898929X NLM ISO Abbreviation: J Cogn Neurosci Subsets: MEDLINE
Imprint Name(s):
Original Publication: Cambridge, Mass. : Published by the MIT Press with the Cognitive Neuroscience Institute, c1989-
MeSH Terms:
Pattern Recognition, Visual*/physiology , Reading* , Evoked Potentials, Visual*/physiology , Brain*/physiology, Humans ; Electroencephalography ; Male ; Female ; Young Adult ; Adult ; Photic Stimulation
References:
Front Neurosci. 2022 Jun 30;16:898800. (PMID: 35844207)
Psychophysiology. 2024 Jul;61(7):e14570. (PMID: 38516957)
J Cogn Neurosci. 2014 Mar;26(3):459-75. (PMID: 24116838)
Trends Cogn Sci. 2011 Jun;15(6):246-53. (PMID: 21549634)
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2018 Feb;71(2):335-359. (PMID: 28376655)
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2015 Apr;16(4):234-44. (PMID: 25783611)
Front Hum Neurosci. 2014 Apr 14;8:213. (PMID: 24782741)
J Neurosci Methods. 2007 May 15;162(1-2):8-13. (PMID: 17254636)
J Neurophysiol. 1998 Jun;79(6):3272-8. (PMID: 9636126)
Psychon Bull Rev. 2010 Dec;17(6):834-9. (PMID: 21169577)
Neuroimage. 2024 Jun;293:120625. (PMID: 38704056)
PLoS One. 2014 May 23;9(5):e98386. (PMID: 24859328)
J Cogn Neurosci. 1999 May;11(3):235-60. (PMID: 10402254)
Sci Rep. 2023 Jul 6;13(1):10979. (PMID: 37414784)
Neuropsychologia. 2022 Nov 5;176:108396. (PMID: 36270326)
Neuroimage. 2006 Nov 1;33(2):749-58. (PMID: 16920367)
Hum Brain Mapp. 2019 Dec 1;40(17):5056-5068. (PMID: 31403749)
J Cogn Neurosci. 2017 Apr;29(4):677-697. (PMID: 27779910)
J Cogn Neurosci. 1996 Nov;8(6):551-565. (PMID: 20740065)
J Cogn Neurosci. 2015 Sep;27(9):1738-51. (PMID: 25848683)
Annu Rev Vis Sci. 2016 Oct 14;2:109-130. (PMID: 28532348)
Neuroimage. 2006 May 1;30(4):1383-400. (PMID: 16460964)
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2006 Dec 29;361(1476):2109-28. (PMID: 17118927)
Curr Opin Psychol. 2019 Oct;29:168-173. (PMID: 30978639)
Atten Percept Psychophys. 2012 Jan;74(1):5-35. (PMID: 22042596)
Neuroimage. 2006 Nov 1;33(2):739-48. (PMID: 16956773)
J Cogn Neurosci. 2014 Nov;26(11):2431-42. (PMID: 24800627)
Neuroimage. 2011 May 1;56(1):330-44. (PMID: 21296170)
Neuroreport. 2000 Jan 17;11(1):69-74. (PMID: 10683832)
Brain Res. 2012 Aug 15;1468:52-62. (PMID: 22784511)
Cereb Cortex. 1998 Oct-Nov;8(7):575-92. (PMID: 9823479)
Neuropsychologia. 2013 Mar;51(4):667-74. (PMID: 23274433)
J Neurosci. 2018 Jan 10;38(2):409-422. (PMID: 29167407)
Dev Sci. 2021 May;24(3):e13060. (PMID: 33159696)
Psychophysiology. 2011 Dec;48(12):1711-25. (PMID: 21895683)
Annu Rev Psychol. 2011;62:621-47. (PMID: 20809790)
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Dec 9;111(49):E5233-42. (PMID: 25422460)
Exp Brain Res. 2002 Jan;142(1):139-50. (PMID: 11797091)
Neuroimage. 2003 Nov;20(3):1609-24. (PMID: 14642472)
Psychophysiology. 2024 Feb;61(2):e14440. (PMID: 37973199)
Neuroimage. 2004 May;22(1):466-76. (PMID: 15110040)
Neuron. 2007 Oct 25;56(2):384-98. (PMID: 17964253)
Science. 2010 Dec 3;330(6009):1359-64. (PMID: 21071632)
Cereb Cortex. 2007 Jul;17(7):1561-9. (PMID: 16950866)
Lang Cogn Neurosci. 2023;38(5):636-650. (PMID: 37304206)
Psychol Sci. 2004 May;15(5):307-13. (PMID: 15102139)
J Neurosci Methods. 2004 Mar 15;134(1):9-21. (PMID: 15102499)
Grant Information:
R01 EY033329 United States EY NEI NIH HHS; R01EY033329 United States NH NIH HHS; R01EY033329 United States NH NIH HHS
Entry Date(s):
Date Created: 20250924 Date Completed: 20260122 Latest Revision: 20260125
Update Code:
20260130
PubMed Central ID:
PMC12462889
DOI:
10.1162/JOCN.a.99
PMID:
40991683
Database:
MEDLINE

*Further Information*

*Learning to read involves the formation and tuning of letter representations, but it is unknown whether this orthographic tuning influences very early visual processing or only later processing. This study tested the hypothesis that experience increases the extraction of sensory information about letters by comparing the EEG activity elicited by upright and inverted letters. In a set of conventional univariate analyses, we found that inverted letters elicited larger P1 amplitudes (starting ca. 110 msec) and larger N170 amplitudes (starting ca. 160 msec) compared with upright letters. These larger amplitudes could reflect enhanced processing, but they might instead reflect degraded processing. We therefore performed multivariate pattern classification (decoding) to assess the amount of information about letter identity in the neural signal. Specifically, we decoded which individual letter was presented from the pattern of voltage across the scalp at each time point. We found that decoding accuracy was greater for upright letters than for inverted letters during the P1 latency range (starting ca. 90 msec), particularly in electrodes over the left hemisphere. This provides evidence for enhanced tuning for upright letters in early visual processing. By contrast, we found higher decoding accuracy for inverted letters than for upright letters during and after the N170 component (starting ca. 140 msec). These results demonstrate that massive experience with upright letters influences sensory processing, leading to enhanced feature extraction for highly familiar (upright) letter forms at an early stage, followed by enhanced neural discriminability for less familiar (inverted) letter forms at a later stage.
(© 2025 Massachusetts Institute of Technology.)*