Abstract
Perceptual distortions are core features of psychosis. Weakened surround suppression has been proposed as a neural mechanism of such atypical perceptual experiences. While previous work has measured suppression by asking participants to report the perceived contrast of a low-contrast target surrounded by a high-contrast surround, it is possible to modulate perceived contrast solely by manipulating the orientation of a matched-contrast center and surround. Removing the bottom-up segmentation cue of contrast difference and isolating the orientation-dependent suppression may clarify the neural processes responsible for atypical surround suppression in psychosis. We examined surround suppression across a spectrum of psychotic psychopathology including people with schizophrenia (PSZ; N=31) and bipolar disorder (PBD; N=29), first-degree biological relatives of these patient groups (PBDrel, PSZrel; N=28, N=21, respectively), and healthy controls (N=29). Surround suppression deficits in PSZ, while observable under many stimulus conditions, were absent under the condition that produced the strongest suppression. PBD and PSZrel exhibited intermediate suppression, while PBDrel performed most similarly to controls. Intriguingly, group differences in surround suppression magnitude were moderated by visual acuity. We propose a potential model by which visual acuity and/or focal attention interact with untuned gain control that reproduces the observed pattern of results including the lack of group differences when orientation of center and surround are the same. Our findings further elucidate perceptual mechanisms of impaired center-surround processing in psychosis and provide insights into the effects of visual acuity on orientation-dependent suppression in PSZ.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by VA Merit Grant I01CX000227; NIH R01MH112583 and NIH U01MH108150.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Participants provided written informed consent before participating in the study. The study protocol was approved and monitored by the Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System and the University of Minnesota Institutional Review Board.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors