Subscribe
The latest psychology and neuroscience discoveries.
My Account
  • Mental Health
  • Social Psychology
  • Cognitive Science
  • Neuroscience
  • About
No Result
View All Result
PsyPost
PsyPost
No Result
View All Result
Home Exclusive Cognitive Science

The human brain can process images the eye sees for 13 milliseconds

by Massachusetts Institute of Technology
January 17, 2014
in Cognitive Science
Share on TwitterShare on Facebook

Human eyeImagine seeing a dozen pictures flash by in a fraction of a second. You might think it would be impossible to identify any images you see for such a short time. However, a team of neuroscientists from MIT has found that the human brain can process entire images that the eye sees for as little as 13 milliseconds — the first evidence of such rapid processing speed.

That speed is far faster than the 100 milliseconds suggested by previous studies. In the new study, which appears in the journal Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, researchers asked subjects to look for a particular type of image, such as “picnic” or “smiling couple,” as they viewed a series of six or 12 images, each presented for between 13 and 80 milliseconds.

“The fact that you can do that at these high speeds indicates to us that what vision does is find concepts. That’s what the brain is doing all day long — trying to understand what we’re looking at,” says Mary Potter, an MIT professor of brain and cognitive sciences and senior author of the study.

This rapid-fire processing may help direct the eyes, which shift their gaze three times per second, to their next target, Potter says. “The job of the eyes is not only to get the information into the brain, but to allow the brain to think about it rapidly enough to know what you should look at next. So in general we’re calibrating our eyes so they move around just as often as possible consistent with understanding what we’re seeing,” she says.

Other authors of the paper are former MIT postdoc Brad Wyble, now at Pennsylvania State University, postdoc Carl Hagmann, and research assistant Emily McCourt.

Rapid identification

After visual input hits the retina, the information flows into the brain, where information such as shape, color, and orientation is processed. In previous studies, Potter has shown that the human brain can correctly identify images seen for as little as 100 milliseconds. In the new study, she and her colleagues decided to gradually increase the speeds until they reached a point where subjects’ answers were no better than if they were guessing. All images were new to the viewers.

The researchers expected they might see a dramatic decline in performance around 50 milliseconds, because other studies have suggested that it takes at least 50 milliseconds for visual information to flow from the retina to the “top” of the visual processing chain in the brain and then back down again for further processing by so-called “re-entrant loops.” These processing loops were believed necessary to confirm identification of a particular scene or object.

Google News Preferences Add PsyPost to your preferred sources

However, the MIT team found that although overall performance declined, subjects continued to perform better than chance as the researchers dropped the image exposure time from 80 milliseconds to 53 milliseconds, then 40 milliseconds, then 27, and finally 13 — the fastest possible rate with the computer monitor being used.

“This didn’t really fit with the scientific literature we were familiar with, or with some common assumptions my colleagues and I have had for what you can see,” Potter says.

Potter believes one reason for the subjects’ better performance in this study may be that they were able to practice fast detection as the images were presented progressively faster, even though each image was unfamiliar. The subjects also received feedback on their performance after each trial, allowing them to adapt to this incredibly fast presentation. At the highest rate, subjects were seeing new images more than 20 times as fast as vision typically absorbs information.

“We think that under these conditions we begin to show more evidence of knowledge than in previous experiments where people hadn’t really been expecting to find success, and didn’t look very hard for it,” Potter says.

The findings are consistent with a 2001 study from researchers at the University of Parma and the University of St. Andrews, who found that neurons in the brains of macaque monkeys that respond to specific types of image, such as faces, could be activated even when the target images were each presented for only 14 milliseconds in a rapid sequence.

“That was the only background that suggested maybe 14 milliseconds was sufficient to get something meaningful into the brain,” Potter says.

One-way flow

The study offers evidence that “feedforward processing” — the flow of information in only one direction, from retina through visual processing centers in the brain — is enough for the brain to identify concepts without having to do any further feedback processing.

It also suggests that while the images are seen for only 13 milliseconds before the next image appears, part of the brain continues to process those images for longer than that, Potter says, because in some cases subjects weren’t asked whether a specified image was present until after they had seen the sequence.

“If images were wiped out after 13 milliseconds, people would never be able to respond positively after the sequence. There has to be something in the brain that has maintained that information at least that long,” she says.

This ability to identify images seen so briefly may help the brain as it decides where to focus the eyes, which dart from point to point in brief movements called fixations about three times per second, Potter says. Deciding where to move the eyes can take 100 to 140 milliseconds, so very high-speed understanding must occur before that.

The researchers are now investigating how long visual information presented so briefly can be held in the brain. They are also scanning subjects’ brains with a magnetoencephalography (MEG) scanner during the task to see what brain regions are active when a person successfully completes the identification task.

Previous Post

Women with a high economic status claim to have better sex

Next Post

Mount Sinai researchers find promising new drug targets for cocaine addiction

RELATED

ChatGPT acts as a “cognitive crutch” that weakens memory, new research suggests
Artificial Intelligence

ChatGPT acts as a “cognitive crutch” that weakens memory, new research suggests

March 30, 2026
Verbal IQ predicts political participation and liberal attitudes twice as strongly as performance IQ
Cognitive Science

Trying harder on an intelligence test does not actually improve your score

March 27, 2026
Brain rot and the crisis of deep thought in the age of social media
Cognitive Science

Massive analysis of longitudinal data links social media to poorer youth mental health

March 27, 2026
High meat consumption may protect against cognitive decline in people with a specific Alzheimer’s gene
Cognitive Science

Asking complex questions improves creative project scores but hurts multiple-choice exam grades

March 26, 2026
Chronic medical conditions predict childhood depression more strongly than social or family hardships
Cognitive Science

What brain waves reveal about people who can solve a Rubik’s Cube in seconds

March 24, 2026
Shifting genetic tides: How early language skills forecast ADHD and literacy outcomes
Cognitive Science

The biological roots behind the chills you get from music and art

March 22, 2026
Machiavellianism most pronounced in students of politics and law, least pronounced in students of social work, nursing and education
Cognitive Science

Intelligence predicts progressive views, but only after college

March 21, 2026
Genetic factors likely confound the link between c-sections and offspring mental health
Cognitive Science

Neuroscientists just upended our understanding of Pavlovian learning

March 21, 2026

STAY CONNECTED

RSS Psychology of Selling

  • Emotional intelligence linked to better sales performance
  • When a goal-driven boss ignores relationships, manipulative employees may fight back
  • When salespeople fail to hit their targets, inner drive matters more than bonus checks
  • The “dark” personality traits that predict sales success — and when they backfire
  • What communication skills do B2B salespeople actually need in a digital-first era?

LATEST

How generative artificial intelligence is upending theories of political persuasion

Scientists use brain measurements to identify a video that significantly lowers racial bias

Brief mindfulness practice accelerates visual processing speeds in adults

Belief in the harmfulness of speech is linked to both progressive ideology and symptoms of depression

Better parent-child communication is linked to stronger soft skills and emotional stability in teens

Men who favor the tradwife lifestyle often view the women in it with derision

A diet based on ultra-processed foods impairs metabolic and reproductive health, study finds

Psychologists identify nine core habits associated with healthy non-monogamous partnerships

PsyPost is a psychology and neuroscience news website dedicated to reporting the latest research on human behavior, cognition, and society. (READ MORE...)

  • Mental Health
  • Neuroimaging
  • Personality Psychology
  • Social Psychology
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Cognitive Science
  • Psychopharmacology
  • Contact us
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy policy
  • Terms and conditions
  • Do not sell my personal information

(c) PsyPost Media Inc

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In

Add New Playlist

Subscribe
  • My Account
  • Cognitive Science Research
  • Mental Health Research
  • Social Psychology Research
  • Drug Research
  • Relationship Research
  • About PsyPost
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy

(c) PsyPost Media Inc