Interocular Suppression Research Articles

Interocular Suppression in Primary Visual Cortex in Strabismus.

People with strabismus acquired during childhood do not experience diplopia (double vision). To investigate how perception of the duplicate image is suppressed, we raised two male monkeys with alternating exotropia by disinserting the medial rectus muscle in each eye at age four weeks. Once the animals were mature, they were brought to the laboratory and trained to fixate a small spot while recordings were made in primary visual cortex (V1). Drifting gratings were presented to the receptive fields of 500 single neurons for eight interleaved conditions: (1) right eye monocular; (2) left eye monocular; (3) right eye's field, right eye fixating; (4) right eye's field, left eye fixating; (5) left eye's field, right eye fixating; (6) left eye's field, left eye fixating; (7) both eyes' fields, right eye fixating; (8) both eyes' fields, left eye fixating. As expected, ocular dominance histograms showed a monocular bias compared with normal animals, but many cells could still be driven via both eyes. Overall, neuronal responses were not affected by switches in ocular fixation. Individual neurons exhibited binocular interactions, but mean population indices indicated no net interocular suppression or facilitation. Even neurons located in cortex with reduced cytochrome oxidase (CO) activity, representing portions of the nasal visual field where perception is suppressed during binocular viewing, showed no net inhibition. These data indicate that V1 neurons do not appear to reflect strabismic suppression and therefore the elimination of diplopia is likely to be mediated at a higher cortical level.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT In patients with strabismus, images fall on non-corresponding points in the two retinas. Only one image is perceived, because signals emanating from the other eye that convey the duplicate image are suppressed. The benefit is that diplopia is prevented, but the penalty is that the visual feedback required to adjust eye muscle tone to realign the globes is eliminated. Here, we report the first electrophysiological recordings from the primary visual cortex (V1) in awake monkeys raised with strabismus. The experiments were designed to reveal how perception of double images is avoided.

Stimulus dependence of interocular suppression

Interocular suppression is the phenomenon in which the signal from one eye inhibits the other eye in the presence of dissimilar images. Various clinical and laboratory-based tests have been used to assess suppression, which vary in color, contrast, and stimulus size. These stimulus variations may yield different spatial extents of suppression, which makes it difficult to compare the outcomes. To evaluate the role of stimulus characteristics, we measured the suppression zone using a binocular rivalry paradigm in normally-sighted observers by systematically varying the stimulus parameters. The stimuli consist of a constantly visible horizontal reference seen by one eye while two vertical suppressors were presented to the other eye. With a keypress, the suppressors appeared for 1 s, to induce a transient suppression zone in the middle part of the reference. Subjects adjusted the width between the suppressors to determine the zone. The zone decreased significantly with increasing spatial frequency and lower contrast. The width was 1.4 times larger than the height. The zone was smaller with negative compared to positive contrast polarity but independent of eye dominance, luminance, and colored filters. A departure from scale invariance was captured with a model suggesting a stimulus-dependent and a small fixed non-stimulus-dependent portion.

Contrast adaptation and interocular transfer in cortical cells: A re-analysis & a two-stage gain-control model of binocular combination

How do V1 cells respond to, adapt to, and combine signals from the two eyes? We tested a simple functional model that has monocular and binocular stages of divisive contrast gain control (CGC) that sit before, and after, binocular summation respectively. Interocular suppression (IOS) was another potential influence on contrast gain. Howarth, Vorobyov & Sengpiel (2009, Cerebral Cortex, 19, 1835–1843) studied contrast adaptation and interocular transfer in cat V1 cells. In our re-analysis we found that ocular dominance (OD) and contrast adaptation at a fixed test contrast were well described by a re-scaling of the unadapted orientation tuning curve – a simple change in response gain. We compared six variants of the basic model, and one model fitted the gain data notably better than the others did. When the dominant eye was tested, adaptation reduced cell response gain more when that eye was adapted than when the other eye was adapted. But when the non-dominant eye was tested, adapting either eye gave about the same reduction in overall gain, and there was an interaction between OD and adapting eye that was well described by the best-fitting model. Two key features of this model are that signals driving IOS arise 'early', before attenuation due to OD, while suppressive CGC signals are 'late' and so affected by OD. We show that late CGC confers a functional advantage: it yields partial compensation for OD, which should reduce ocular imbalance at the input to binocular summation, and improve the cell's sensitivity to variation in stereo disparity.

Color Can Shorten Breakthrough Times in Continuous Flash Suppression through Increased Salience and Task Relevance

Color can enhance the perception of relevant stimuli by increasing their salience and guiding visual search towards stimuli that match a task-relevant color. Using Continuous Flash Suppression (CFS), the current study investigated whether color facilitates the discrimination of targets that are difficult to perceive due to interocular suppression. Gabor patterns of two or four cycles per degree (cpd) were shown as targets to the non-dominant eye of human participants. CFS masks were presented at a rate of 10 Hz to the dominant eye, and participants had the task to report the target’s orientation as soon as they could discriminate it. The 2-cpd targets were robustly suppressed and resulted in much longer response times compared to 4-cpd targets. Moreover, only for 2-cpd targets, two color-related effects were evident. First, in trials where targets and CFS masks had different colors, targets were reported faster than in trials where targets and CFS masks had the same color. Second, targets with a known color, either cyan or yellow, were reported earlier than targets whose color was randomly cyan or yellow. The results suggest that the targets’ entry to consciousness may have been speeded by color-mediated effects relating to increased (bottom-up) salience and (top-down) task relevance.

Dissociating conscious and unconscious influences on visual detection effects.

The scope of unconscious processing is highly debated, with recent studies showing that even high-level functions such as perceptual integration and category-based attention occur unconsciously. For example, upright faces that are suppressed from awareness through interocular suppression break into awareness more quickly than inverted faces. Similarly, verbal object cues boost otherwise invisible objects into awareness. Here, we replicate these findings, but find that they reflect a general difference in detectability not specific to interocular suppression. To dissociate conscious and unconscious influences on visual detection effects, we use an additional discrimination task to rule out conscious processes as a cause for these differences. Results from this detection-discrimination dissociation paradigm reveal that, while face orientation is processed unconsciously, category-based attention requires awareness. These findings provide insights into the function of conscious perception and offer an experimental approach for mapping out the scope and limits of unconscious processing.

Interocular Suppression as Revealed by Dichoptic Masking Is Orientation-Dependent and Imbalanced in Amblyopia.

PurposeWe investigate the orientation tuning of interocular suppression using a dichoptic masking paradigm in adult controls and amblyopes.MethodsFourteen adults with anisometropic or mixed amblyopia and 10 control adults participated in our study. Contrast sensitivity was measured by presenting a target Gabor in the tested eye and mean luminance in the untested eye (monocular) and by presenting a target in the tested eye and a bandpass oriented filtered noise in the other eye (masked). Interocular suppression was defined as the thresholds difference between the monocular and masked conditions for each eye. Interocular suppression was measured under parallel and orthogonal suppression configurations. The peak spatial frequency of the target and mask was 0.25 c/d in experiment 1 (low), 1.31 c/d in experiment 2 (mid), and 6.87 c/d in experiment 3 (high).ResultsThe masking suppression induced by the amblyopic eye was less strong than that induced by the fellow eye. The suppression from the fellow eye was similar to that observed in the controls. Interocular suppression under parallel configuration was less strong than under orthogonal configuration in amblyopes at low and mid spatial frequency, but not at high spatial frequency.ConclusionsWe demonstrate that the abnormal interocular masking in amblyopia displays the expected characteristic of orientation selectivity expected of normal controls at low and mid spatial frequency, but not at high spatial frequency. The dichoptic masking imbalance between the eyes of amblyopes results in a net suppression of the amblyopic eye during binocular viewing, modeling clinical suppression.

Binocular summation and efficient coding

Two eyes are better than one at detecting a pattern, an advantage termed binocular summation. It is widely believed that binocular summation is mediated by neurons that sum the two eyes’ inputs. Here we suggest an alternative model based on a model of binocular interactions proposed by Cohn, Leong & Lasley (Vision Research, 1981, 21, 1017–1023) and further motivated by the efficient coding framework proposed by Li & Atick (Network: Computation in Neural Systems, 1994, 5, 157–174). In the model, termed MAX(S+S−), binocular summation is mediated by channels that compute the sum, S+, and difference, S−, of the two eyes’ monocular signals. The S+ and S− signals are assumed to be perturbed by independent noise, have independent gains and contribute independently to detection via the MAX rule. To test the model we measured binocular summation for horizontally-oriented Gabor patches at a range of spatial-frequencies and bandwidths, at both contrast detection threshold and for increment thresholds on binocular pedestals at contrasts set to 10x detection threshold. The model’s performance was compared to that of two conventional models of binocular summation, one in which the two eyes’ signals remain separate at the decision stage, termed MAX(LR), the other in which the two eye’s signals are summed by a single channel, termed B+, with both models incorporating interocular inhibition. The MAX(S+S−) model gave as good a performance as the other two models. Together with the evidence for the involvement of separately gain controlled S+ and S− signals underpinning a wide range of binocular behaviors, we conclude that the MAX(S+S−) model can and should be considered as a viable model for binocular summation.

A New Dichoptic Training Strategy Leads to Better Cooperation Between the Two Eyes in Amblyopia.

Recent clinical trials failed to endorse dichoptic training for amblyopia treatment. Here, we proposed an alternative training strategy that focused on reducing signal threshold contrast in the amblyopic eye under a constant and high noise contrast in the fellow eye (HNC), and compared it to a typical dichoptic strategy that aimed at increasing the tolerable noise contrast in the fellow eye (i.e., TNC strategy). We recruited 16 patients with amblyopia and divided them into two groups. Eight patients in Group 1 received the HNC training, while the other eight patients in Group 2 performed the TNC training first (Phase 1) and then crossed over to the HNC training (Phase 2). We measured contrast sensitivity functions (CSFs) separately in the amblyopic and fellow eyes when the untested eye viewed mean luminance (monocularly unmasked) or noise stimuli (dichoptically masked) before and after training at a particular frequency. The area under the log contrast sensitivity function (AULCSF) of masked and unmasked conditions, and dichoptic gain (the ratio of AULCSF of masked to unmasked condition) were calculated for each eye. We found that both dichoptic training paradigms substantially improved masked CSF, dichoptic gain, and visual acuity in the amblyopic eye. As opposed to the TNC paradigm, the HNC training produced stronger effects on masked CSFs, stereoacuity, dichoptic gain, and visual acuity in the amblyopic eye. Interestingly, the second-phase HNC training in Group 2 also induced further improvement in the masked contrast sensitivity and AULCSF in the amblyopic eye. We concluded that the HNC training strategy was more effective than the TNC training paradigm. Future design for dichoptic training should not only focus on increasing the tolerable noise contrast in the fellow eye but should also “nurture” the amblyopic eye under normal binocular viewing conditions and sustained interocular suppression.

Perceptual enhancement of suprathreshold luminance modulation in stereoscopic patterns.

Previous studies have shown that the binocular summation of luminance contrast signals depends on the parameters involved in stereopsis when the luminance contrast is at the detection threshold. However, less attention has been paid to the perception of luminance modulation in stereoscopic patterns at suprathreshold contrast. To address this issue, we determined the contrast of stereoscopic patterns at the perceptual match to a standard contrast as a function of binocular disparity. The matched contrast was close to the standard contrast at 0 degrees disparity, but decreased as disparity deviated from 0 degrees, suggesting that sufficient disparity perceptually enhances luminance contrast. The reduction of matched contrast was more evident for uncrossed disparities than for crossed disparities, which almost disappeared when the contrast was near the threshold and also occurred when vertical disparity was introduced. We argue that the perceptual enhancement of the luminance contrast is due to the weaker interocular suppression for stimuli with large disparities.

Grouping dichoptically-produced plaids: Ruling out changes in interocular suppression as an explanation

Grouping dichoptically-produced plaids: Ruling out changes in interocular suppression as an explanation

Dynamic face mask enhances continuous flash suppression

In continuous flash suppression (CFS), an image presented to one eye is suppressed from awareness by a dynamic image masker presented to the other eye. Previous studies report that face stimuli break out of CFS more readily when they are oriented upright and contain ecologically relevant information such as facial expressions or direct eye gaze, potentially implicating face processing in the mechanisms of interocular competition. It is unknown, however, whether face content helps to drive interocular suppression when incorporated into the dynamic masker itself, either by engaging higher-level visual mechanisms that underlie face detection or due to lower-level image features that the faces happen to contain. To investigate this, we devised a dynamic mask composed of upright faces and tested how well it suppressed detection of face or grating targets presented to the other eye. Relative contributions of higher-level and lower-level features were compared by manipulating the image properties of the mask. Results show that the dynamic face mask is strikingly effective at suppressing sensory input presented to the opposing eye, but its effectiveness is largely attributable to image texture, which can be quantified in terms of image entropy and edge density. This is because strong suppression was still observed following phase-scrambling or spatial inversion of the face elements, and while a target-selective effect was observed for the face mask, inverting the face elements to interfere with configural processing did not significantly diminish this effect. Thus, visual properties of faces, such as their image entropy and complex phase structure, predominate in driving interocular suppression rather than face detection per se.

A pilot randomized trial of contrast-rebalanced binocular treatment for deprivation amblyopia

Binocular neural architecture may be preserved in children with deprivation amblyopia dueto unilateral cataract. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether a contrast-rebalanced binocular treatment, recently used with success to treat the interocular suppression and amblyopia in strabismic and anisometropic children, can contribute to rehabilitation of visual acuity in children with deprivation amblyopia secondary to monocular cataract. In a pilot randomized trial, 15 children (4-13years of age) were enrolled and randomized to continue with their current treatment only (n=7) or to continue with their current treatment and add contrast-rebalanced binocular iPad game play 5hours/week for 4weeks (n=8). The primary outcome was change in visual acuity at 4weeks. Although 10 of 15 participants were patching, there was little change in visual acuity during the 3months prior to enrollment. At the 4-week primary outcome visit, the mean improvement in visual acuity for the binocular game group was significantly greater than that for the current-treatment group (0.08±0.10 logMAR vs -0.03±0.05 logMAR [t10.2=2.53, P=0.03]). None of the children who had dense congenital cataract achieved improved visual acuity with binocular treatment. In this study cohort, visual acuity improved over 8weeks in children with unilateral deprivation amblyopia who played a binocular contrast-rebalanced binocular iPad game.

Interocular ND filter suppression: Eccentricity and luminance polarity effects.

The depth and extent of interocular suppression were measured in binocularly normal observers who unilaterally adapted to neutral density (ND) filters (0, 1.5, 2, and 3 ND). Suppression was measured by dichoptically matching sectors of a ring presented to the adapted eye to a fixed contrast contiguous ring presented to the non-adapted eye. Other rings of alternating polarity were viewed binocularly. Rings were defined by luminance (L), luminance with added dynamic binary luminance noise (LM), and contrast modulating the same noise (CM). Interocular suppression depth increased with increasing ND, nearing significance (p = 0.058) for 1.5 ND. For L and LM stimuli, suppression depth across eccentricity (±12° visual field) differed for luminance increment (white) versus luminance decrement (black) stimuli, potentially confounding eccentricity results. Suppression for increment-only (white) luminance stimuli was steeper centrally and extended across the visual field, but was deeper for L than for LM stimuli. Suppression for decrement-only (black) luminance stimuli revealed only central suppression. Suppression was deeper with CM than LM stimuli, suggesting that CM stimuli are extracted in areas receiving predominantly binocular input which may be more sensitive to binocular disruption. Increment (white) luminance stimuli demonstrate deeper interocular suppression in the periphery than decrement (black) stimuli, so they are more sensitive to changes in peripheral suppression. Asymmetry of suppression in the periphery for opposite polarity luminance stimuli may be due to interocular receptive field size mismatch as a result of dark adaptation separately affecting ON and OFF pathways. Clinically, measurement of suppression with CM stimuli may provide the best information about post-combination binocularity.

Characterization, passive and active treatment in strabismic amblyopia: a narrative review.

Strabismic amblyopia is characterized by a distorted spatial perception. In this condition, the neurofunctional disorder occurring during first years of life provoke several monocular and binocular anomalies such as crowding, deficits in the accommodative response, contrast sensitivity, and ocular motility abilities. The inhibition of the binocular function of the brain by the misaligned amblyopic eye induces a binocular imbalance leading to interocular suppression and the reduction or lack of stereoacuity. Passive treatments such as occlusion, optical and/or pharmacological penalization, and Bangerter foils has been demonstrated to be potentially useful treatments for strabismic amblyopia. Recent researches have proved new pharmacological options to improve and maintain visual acuity after occlusion treatment in strabismic amblyopia. Likewise, the active vision therapy, in the last years, is becoming a very relevant therapeutic option in combination with passive treatments, especially during and after monocular therapy, in the attempt of recovering the imbalanced binocular vision.

Binocular rivalry from luminance and contrast

Binocular rivalry is the phenomenon that when two incompatible images are simultaneously presented, one to each eye, the two images compete with each other to be the dominant percept. Studying the underlying neural mechanisms of binocular rivalry is useful for understanding the mechanisms of interocular inhibition. Levelt’s Propositions, a set of four propositions that were originally published over fifty years ago, are not only useful for characterizing the perceptual dynamics of binocular rivalry, but can also provide a metric for assessing the common or differential neural mechanisms of binocular rivalry when diverse stimulus types are used. In the present study, we conducted a series of psychophysics experiments, where we compared the rivalry dynamics of two quite different types of stimuli. Orthogonal gratings, a classic type of rivalry stimulus, were contrasted with luminance patches, a type of rivalry stimulus that is relatively less studied. Our results showed that, similar to the orthogonal gratings, the alternate percepts in luminance-only rivalry were described by the modified Levelt’s Propositions, despite the clearly slower alternation rates for luminance patches. However, unlike the mixed percepts observed during transitions between oriented gratings, fusion percepts during luminance rivalry were common, could be lustrous, and obeyed the same Propositions, suggesting a regime of tri-stability. Overall, both types of rivalry are consistent with recent models that posit separate binocular and monocular channels embedded within neural circuits that also accomplish contrast normalization. Finally, luminance rivalry is discussed in the contexts of binocular summation and suppression, as well as Fechner’s paradox.

Using psychophysical performance to predict short-term ocular dominance plasticity in human adults.

Binocular rivalry has become an important index of visual performance, both to measure ocular dominance or its plasticity, and to index bistable perception. We investigated its interindividual variability across 50 normal adults and found that the duration of dominance phases in rivalry is linked with the duration of dominance phases in another bistable phenomenon (structure from motion). Surprisingly, it also correlates with the strength of center–surround interactions (indexed by the tilt illusion), suggesting a common mechanism supporting both competitive interactions: center–surround and rivalry.In a subset of 34 participants, we further investigated the variability of short-term ocular dominance plasticity, measured with binocular rivalry before and after 2 hours of monocular deprivation. We found that ocular dominance shifts in favor of the deprived eye and that a large portion of ocular dominance variability after deprivation can be predicted from the dynamics of binocular rivalry before deprivation. The single best predictor is the proportion of mixed percepts (phases without dominance of either eye) before deprivation, which is positively related to ocular dominance unbalance after deprivation. Another predictor is the duration of dominance phases, which interacts with mixed percepts to explain nearly 50% of variance in ocular dominance unbalance after deprivation. A similar predictive power is achieved by substituting binocular rivalry dominance phase durations with tilt illusion magnitude, or structure from motion phase durations. Thus, we speculate that ocular dominance plasticity is modulated by two types of signals, estimated from psychophysical performance before deprivation, namely, interocular inhibition (promoting binocular fusion, hence mixed percepts) and inhibition for perceptual competition (promoting longer dominance phases and stronger center–surround interactions).

Quantifying Nasotemporal Asymmetry of Interocular Suppression in Alternating Strabismus After Correction.

PurposeThis study identifies and characterizes the nasotemporal hemifield difference of interocular suppression in subjects who have been successfully treated for strabismus.MethodsInterocular suppression in the nasal and temporal hemifields were measured using two methods, namely, binocular phase combination and dichoptic motion coherence, both entailed suprathreshold stimuli. We tested 29 clinical subjects, who had strabismus (19 with exotropia and 10 with esotropia) but regained good ocular alignment (within 10 prism diopters) after surgical or refractive correction, and 10 control subjects.ResultsBoth the hemifield binocular phase combination and the hemifield dichoptic motion coherence tests revealed similar nasotemporal asymmetry of interocular suppression. Subjects with previous exotropia showed deeper suppression in the nasal hemifield, and those with previous esotropia showed deeper suppression in the temporal hemifield. This finding was consistent with the hemifield suppression theory. Furthermore, there was deeper suppression but less imbalance of nasotemporal asymmetry in the hemifield dichoptic motion coherence test. Finally, clinical stereopsis and the nasotemporal asymmetry of suppression (P < 0.05 in both tests) were negatively correlated in subjects with previous exotropia and measurable stereopsis.ConclusionsHemifield asymmetry of interocular suppression in corrected strabismus can be measured by using static and dynamic suprathreshold stimuli. Thus, the evaluation of binocular vision in strabismus should focus on both the magnitude and the pattern of interocular suppression.

The Potential of Virtual Reality for Inducing Neuroplasticity in Children with Amblyopia.

In recent years, virtual reality (VR) has emerged as a new safe and effective tool for neurorehabilitation of different childhood and adulthood conditions. VR-based therapies can induce cortical reorganization and promote the activation of different neuronal connections over a wide range of ages, leading to contrasted improvements in motor and functional skills. The use of VR for the visual rehabilitation in amblyopia has been investigated in the last years, with the potential of using serious games combining perceptual learning and dichoptic stimulation. This combination of technologies allows the clinician to measure, treat, and control changes in interocular suppression, which is one of the factors leading to cortical alterations in amblyopia. Several clinical researches on this issue have been conducted, showing the potential of promoting visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and stereopsis improvement. Indeed, several systems have been evaluated for amblyopia treatment including the use of different commercially available types of head mounted displays (HMDs). These HMDs are mostly well tolerated by patients during short exposures and do not cause significant long-term side effects, although their use has been occasionally associated with some visual discomfort and other complications in certain types of subjects. More studies are needed to confirm these promising therapies in controlled randomized clinical trials, with special emphasis on the definition of the most adequate planning for obtaining an effective recovery of the visual and binocular function.

Suppression Rather Than Visual Acuity Loss Limits Stereoacuity in Amblyopia.

PurposeTo investigate the influence of interocular suppression and visual acuity loss on stereoacuity in observers with and without abnormal vision development from strabismus or amblyopia. To determine whether stereoacuity improves in amblyopic observers when suppression is neutralized.MethodsExperiment 1: Visual acuity (VA), depth of suppression (contrast ratio [CR]), and stereoacuity (digital random-dot) were tested in adult amblyopic observers (n = 21; age 27 ± 11 years). Experiment 2: VA, stereoacuity, and CR were measured at baseline and through a series of monocular contrast attenuation and Bangerter filter conditions that degrade visual input in participants with normal binocular vision (n = 19; age 31 ± 13 years). Multiple regression models were used to determine relative contribution of VA and CR to stereoacuity in both groups. Experiment 3: stereoacuity was retested in a subsample of amblyopic observers (n = 7) after contrast reduction of the stimulus presented to dominant eye to neutralize suppression.ResultsIn amblyopic observers, stereoacuity significantly correlated with CR (P < 0.001), but not with interocular VA difference (P = 0.863). In participants with normal vision development, stereoacuity, VA, and CR declined with introduction of monocular Bangerter filter (P < 0.001), and stereoacuity reduced with monocular attenuation of stimulus contrast (P < 0.001). Reduction in stereoacuity correlated with both VA decrement and degraded CR. Stereoacuity significantly improved in amblyopic observers when the contrast to the dominant eye was adjusted based on the contrast ratio.ConclusionsSuppression rather than visual acuity loss limits stereoacuity in observers with abnormal vision development. Stereopsis can be improved when interocular sensory dominance is neutralized.

Faces under continuous flash suppression capture attention faster than objects, but without a face-evoked steady-state visual potential: Is curvilinearity responsible for the behavioral effect?

Face perception is a vital part of human social interactions. The social value of faces makes their efficient detection evolutionarily advantageous. It has been suggested that this might occur nonconsciously, but experimental results are equivocal thus far. Here, we probe nonconscious face perception using a novel combination of binocular rivalry with continuous flash suppression and steady-state visually evoked potentials. In the first two experiments, participants viewed either non-face objects, neutral faces (Study 1), or fearful faces (Study 2). Consistent with the hypothesis that faces are processed nonconsciously, we found that faces broke through suppression faster than objects. We did not, however, observe a concomitant face-selective steady-state visually evoked potential. Study 3 was run to reconcile this paradox. We hypothesized that the faster breakthrough time was due to a mid-level visual feature, curvilinearity, rather than high-level category membership, which would explain the behavioral difference without neural evidence of face-selective processing. We tested this hypothesis by presenting participants with four different groups of stimuli outside of conscious awareness: rectilinear objects (e.g., chessboard), curvilinear objects (e.g., dartboard), faces, and objects that were not dominantly curvilinear or rectilinear. We found that faces and curvilinear objects broke through suppression faster than objects and rectilinear objects. Moreover, there was no difference between faces and curvilinear objects. These results support our hypothesis that the observed behavioral advantage for faces is due to their curvilinearity, rather than category membership.