Toward a New Model of Scientific Publishing: Discussion and a Proposal

The current system of publishing in the biological sciences is notable for its redundancy, inconsistency, sluggishness, and opacity. These problems persist, and grow worse, because the peer review system remains focused on deciding whether or not to publish a paper in a particular journal rather than providing (1) a high-quality evaluation of scientific merit and (2) the information necessary to organize and prioritize the literature. Online access has eliminated the need for journals as distribution channels, so their primary current role is to provide authors with feedback prior to publication and a quick way for other researchers to prioritize the literature based on which journal publishes a paper. However, the feedback provided by reviewers is not focused on scientific merit but on whether to publish in a particular journal, which is generally of little use to authors and an opaque and noisy basis for prioritizing the literature. Further, each submission of a rejected manuscript requires the entire machinery of peer review to creak to life anew. This redundancy incurs delays, inconsistency, and increased burdens on authors, reviewers, and editors. Finally, reviewers have no real incentive to review well or quickly, as their performance is not tracked, let alone rewarded. One of the consistent suggestions for modifying the current peer review system is the introduction of some form of post-publication reception, and the development of a marketplace where the priority of a paper rises and falls based on its reception from the field (see other articles in this special topics). However, the information that accompanies a paper into the marketplace is as important as the marketplace’s mechanics. Beyond suggestions concerning the mechanisms of reception, we propose an update to the system of publishing in which publication is guaranteed, but pre-publication peer review still occurs, giving the authors the opportunity to revise their work following a mini pre-reception from the field. This step also provides a consistent set of rankings and reviews to the marketplace, allowing for early prioritization and stabilizing its early dynamics. We further propose to improve the general quality of reviewing by providing tangible rewards to those who do it well

Making sense of real-world scenes

To interact with the world, we have to make sense of the continuous sensory input conveying information about our environment. A recent surge of studies has investigated the processes enabling scene understanding, using increasingly complex stimuli and sophisticated analyses to highlight the visual features and brain regions involved. However, there are two major challenges to producing a comprehensive framework for scene understanding. First, scene perception is highly dynamic, subserving multiple behavioral goals. Second, a multitude of different visual properties co-occur across scenes and may be correlated or independent. We synthesize the recent literature and argue that for a complete view of scene understanding, it is necessary to account for both differing observer goals and the contribution of diverse scene properties

Holding a Stick at Both Ends: On Faces and Expertise

Ever since Diamond and Carey\u27s (1986) seminal work, object expertise has often been viewed through the prism of face perception (for a thorough discussion, see Tanaka and Gauthier, 1997; Sheinberg and Tarr, 2010). According to Wong and Wong (2014, W&W), however, this emphasis has simply been a response to the question of modularity of face perception, and has not been about expertise in and of itself. It is precisely this conflation of questions of expertise and modularity, the consequent focus on FFA, and the detrimental effect this had on the field of object expertise research that we discussed as part of our original review (Harel et al., 2013)

Direct comparison of contralateral bias and face/scene selectivity in human occipitotemporal cortex

Human visual cortex is organised broadly according to two major principles: retinotopy (the spatial mapping of the retina in cortex) and category-selectivity (preferential responses to specific categories of stimuli). Historically, these principles were considered anatomically separate, with retinotopy restricted to the occipital cortex and category-selectivity emerging in the lateral-occipital and ventral-temporal cortex. However, recent studies show that category-selective regions exhibit systematic retinotopic biases, for example exhibiting stronger activation for stimuli presented in the contra- compared to the ipsilateral visual field. It is unclear, however, whether responses within category-selective regions are more strongly driven by retinotopic location or by category preference, and if there are systematic differences between category-selective regions in the relative strengths of these preferences. Here, we directly compare contralateral and category preferences by measuring fMRI responses to scene and face stimuli presented in the left or right visual field and computing two bias indices: a contralateral bias (response to the contralateral minus ipsilateral visual field) and a face/scene bias (preferred response to scenes compared to faces, or vice versa). We compare these biases within and between scene- and face-selective regions and across the lateral and ventral surfaces of the visual cortex more broadly. We find an interaction between surface and bias: lateral surface regions show a stronger contralateral than face/scene bias, whilst ventral surface regions show the opposite. These effects are robust across and within subjects, and appear to reflect large-scale, smoothly varying gradients. Together, these findings support distinct functional roles for the lateral and ventral visual cortex in terms of the relative importance of the spatial location of stimuli during visual information processing. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00429-021-02411-8

Representation of contralateral visual space in the human hippocampus

The initial encoding of visual information primarily from the contralateral visual field is a fundamental organizing principle of the primate visual system. Recently, the presence of such retinotopic sensitivity has been shown to extend well beyond early visual cortex to regions not historically considered retinotopically sensitive. In particular, human scene-selective regions in parahippocampal and medial parietal cortex exhibit prominent biases for the contralateral visual field. Here we used fMRI to test the hypothesis that the human hippocampus, which is thought to be anatomically connected with these scene-selective regions, would also exhibit a biased representation of contralateral visual space. First, population receptive field mapping with scene stimuli revealed strong biases for the contralateral visual field in bilateral hippocampus. Second, the distribution of retinotopic sensitivity suggested a more prominent representation in anterior medial portions of the hippocampus. Finally, the contralateral bias was confirmed in independent data taken from the Human Connectome Project initiative. The presence of contralateral biases in the hippocampus - a structure considered by many as the apex of the visual hierarchy - highlights the truly pervasive influence of retinotopy. Moreover, this finding has important implications for understanding how this information relates to the allocentric global spatial representations known to be encoded therein.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT:Retinotopic encoding of visual information is an organizing principle of visual cortex. Recent work demonstrates this sensitivity in structures far beyond early visual cortex, including those anatomically connected to the hippocampus. Here, using population receptive field modelling in two independent sets of data we demonstrate a consistent bias for the contralateral visual field in bilateral hippocampus. Such a bias highlights the truly pervasive influence of retinotopy, with important implications for understanding how the presence of retinotopy relates to more allocentric spatial representations

False Approximations of the Approximate Number System?

Prior research suggests that the acuity of the approximate number system (ANS) predicts future mathematical abilities. Modelling the development of the ANS might therefore allow monitoring of children's mathematical skills and instigate educational intervention if necessary. A major problem however, is that our knowledge of the development of the ANS is acquired using fundamentally different paradigms, namely detection in infants versus discrimination in children and adults. Here, we question whether such a comparison is justified, by testing the adult ANS with both a discrimination and a detection task. We show that adults perform markedly better in the discrimination compared to the detection task. Moreover, performance on discrimination but not detection, correlated with performance on mathematics. With a second similar experiment, in which the detection task was replaced by a same-different task, we show that the results of experiment 1 cannot be attributed to differences in chance level. As only task instruction differed, the discrimination and the detection task most likely reflect differences at the decisional level. Future studies intending to model the development of the ANS should therefore rely on data derived from a single paradigm for different age groups. The same-different task appears a viable candidate, due to its applicability across age groups

Integration of visual and auditory information by superior temporal sulcus neurons responsive to the sight of actions

& Processing of complex visual stimuli comprising facial movements, hand actions, and body movements is known to occur in the superior temporal sulcus (STS) of humans and nonhuman primates. The STS is also thought to play a role in the integration of multimodal sensory input. We investigated whether STS neurons coding the sight of actions also integrated the sound of those actions. For 23 % of neurons responsive to the sight of an action, the sound of that action significantly modulated the visual response. The sound of the action increased or decreased the visually evoked response for an equal number of neurons. In the neurons whose visual response was increased by the addition of sound (but not those neurons whose responses were decreased), the audiovisual integration was dependent upon the sound of the action matching the sight of the action. These results suggest that neurons in the STS form multisensory representations of observed actions. &amp

Is Visual Selective Attention in Deaf Individuals Enhanced or Deficient? The Case of the Useful Field of View

BACKGROUND: Early deafness leads to enhanced attention in the visual periphery. Yet, whether this enhancement confers advantages in everyday life remains unknown, as deaf individuals have been shown to be more distracted by irrelevant information in the periphery than their hearing peers. Here, we show that, in a complex attentional task, a performance advantage results for deaf individuals. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We employed the Useful Field of View (UFOV) which requires central target identification concurrent with peripheral target localization in the presence of distractors - a divided, selective attention task. First, the comparison of deaf and hearing adults with or without sign language skills establishes that deafness and not sign language use drives UFOV enhancement. Second, UFOV performance was enhanced in deaf children, but only after 11 years of age. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: This work demonstrates that, following early auditory deprivation, visual attention resources toward the periphery slowly get augmented to eventually result in a clear behavioral advantage by pre-adolescence on a selective visual attention task