Attention modulates visual size adaptation

Abstract

The current study determined in healthy subjects (n = 16) whether size adaptation occurs at early, i.e., preattentive, levels of processing or whether higher cognitive processes such as attention can modulate the illusion. To investigate this issue, bottom-up stimulation was kept constant across conditions by using a single adaptation display containing both small and large adapter stimuli. Subjects' attention was directed to either the large or small adapter stimulus by means of a luminance detection task. When attention was directed toward the small as compared to the large adapter, the perceived size of the subsequent target was significantly increased. Data suggest that different size adaptation effects can be induced by one and the same stimulus depending on the current allocation of attention. This indicates that size adaptation is subject to attentional modulation. These findings are in line with previous research showing that transient as well as sustained attention modulates visual features, such as contrast sensitivity and spatial frequency, and influences adaptation in other contexts, such as motion adaptation (Alais & Blake, 1999; Lankheet & Verstraten, 1995). Based on a recently suggested model (Pooresmaeili, Arrighi, Biagi, & Morrone, 2013), according to which perceptual adaptation is based on local excitation and inhibition in V1, we conclude that guiding attention can boost these local processes in one or the other direction by increasing the weight of the attended adapter. In sum, perceptual adaptation, although reflected in changes of neural activity at early levels (as shown in the aforementioned study), is nevertheless subject to higher-order modulation.

The role of feature-based attention in visual serial dependence

“…While this is reminiscent of classical negative perceptual adaptation (Webster, 2015), classical tilt aftereffects predominantly occur for orientation differences between 08 and 458 and can turn into attractive biases for larger differences (Gibson & Radner, 1937). Furthermore, perceptual adaptation effects have been found to be modulated, albeit weakly, by feature-based attention (Kreutzer, Fink, & Weidner, 2015;Spivey & Spirn, 2000). Thus, it appears unlikely that the repulsive biases we observed reflect classical perceptual adaptation.…”

The role of feature-based attention in visual serial dependence

“…While reminiscent of classical negative perceptual adaptation (Webster, 2015), classical tilt-aftereffects predominantly occur for orientation differences between 0 and 45° and can turn into attractive biases for larger differences (Gibson & Radner, 1937). Furthermore, perceptual adaptation effects have been found to be modulated, albeit weakly, by feature-based attention (Spivey & Spirn, 2000;Kreutzer, Fink, & Weidner, 2015). Thus, it appears unlikely that the currently observed repulsive biases reflect classical perceptual adaptation.…”

Adaptation to the Speed of Biological Motion in Autism

“…We employed child-and autism-friendly methodologies and we also aimed to account for participants' attention to the stimuli. This was important as earlier studies have shown that attention modulates the size of adaptation (Kreutzer et al 2015;Rhodes et al 2011). Controlling for attention was achieved by employing a dual-task paradigm, in which the primary task measured the perception of biological motion and adaptive coding, while the secondary task motivated participants to attend to the middle of the screen and assessed their attention (see also Ewing et al 2013b;Karaminis et al 2015;Lawson et al 2018;Rhodes et al 2018).…”