Attenuation of the pupillary response to luminance and color changes during interocular suppression

Kimura, Eiji; Abe, Satoru; Goryo, Ken

doi:10.1167/14.5.14

Cited by 14 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This kind of constriction is similar in size, but opposite in sign, to the engagement-related dilation mentioned above (about 0.1 to 1 mm in diameter; Slooter & van Norren 1980;Barbur et al 1992;Young et al 1993;Conway et al 2008), matching our finding of similar magnitudes for both our positive and our negative rapid response component. Several lines of evidence suggest a cortical contribution to constrictions in response to isoluminant input transients: these constrictions are virtually abolished by cortical lesions (Barbur et al 1992;Heywood et al 1998), and they are modulated by attention withdrawal and interocular suppression (Kimura et al 2014;Kaneko et al 2019), as well as by stimulus properties that lack a specific representation outside of cortex (e.g. the orientation of a viewed face; Conway et al 2008).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Separable pupillary signatures of perception and action during perceptual multistability

Brascamp

Hollander

Wertheimer

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The pupil provides a rich, non-invasive measure of the neural bases of perception and cognition. It can particularly inform about the role of arousal-linked neuromodulation, which alters both cortical processing and pupil size. But a multitude of factors influence pupil size, which complicates interpretation. We measured pupil signals accompanying changes in multistable perception, i.e. accompanying endogenously-generated perceptual changes in the face of inconclusive sensory input. Perceptual changes were marked by a complex pupil response that could be decomposed into two components: a dilation tied to task execution and plausibly reflecting arousal-linked noradrenaline, and an overlapping constriction tied to the perceptual transient and plausibly reflecting altered cortical responses. Constriction, but not dilation, amplitude depended on the timing of perceptual changes, possibly providing an index of neural adaptation. We conclude that pupil size reflects several dissociable processes during perceptual multistability, and that arousal-linked neuromodulation shapes action but not perception in these circumstances.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Separable pupillary signatures of perception and action during perceptual multistability

Brascamp

Hollander

Wertheimer

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several elegant studies using binocular rivalry, dating back almost a century, already revealed cognitive influeces on the pupil light response (Bárány & Halldén, 1948; Brenner, Charles, & Flynn, 1969; Harms, 1937; Lowe & Ogle, 1966; for recent replications, see Fahle, Stemmler, & Spang, 2011; Kimura, Abe, & Goryo, 2014; Naber, Frassle, & Einhauser, 2011). For example, Bárány & Halldén (1948) presented a horizontal line to one eye, and a vertical line to the other eye.…”

Section: The Pupil Light Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

Pupillometry: Psychology, Physiology, and Function

Mathôt

2018

Journal of Cognition

568

548

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pupils respond to three distinct kinds of stimuli: they constrict in response to brightness (the pupil light response), constrict in response to near fixation (the pupil near response), and dilate in response to increases in arousal and mental effort, either triggered by an external stimulus or spontaneously. In this review, I describe these three pupil responses, how they are related to high-level cognition, and the neural pathways that control them. I also discuss the functional relevance of pupil responses, that is, how pupil responses help us to better see the world. Although pupil responses likely serve many functions, not all of which are fully understood, one important function is to optimize vision either for acuity (small pupils see sharper) and depth of field (small pupils see sharply at a wider range of distances), or for sensitivity (large pupils are better able to detect faint stimuli); that is, pupils change their size to optimize vision for a particular situation. In many ways, pupil responses are similar to other eye movements, such as saccades and smooth pursuit: like these other eye movements, pupil responses have properties of both reflexive and voluntary action, and are part of active visual exploration.

show abstract

“…The long-lasting, sustained pupil dilation response reflecting arousal may be different from the fast, transient component that presumably reflects other cognitive states and thus affect the feeling of attractiveness. Indeed, other studies showed that pupils in general quickly constrict in response to the mere onset of visual presentation (even when the mean luminance is equated, e.g., Kimura, Abe, & Goryo, 2014) and that this early and reflexive pupillary constriction response is modulated by various cognitive factors such as memory (Naber et al, 2013), attention (Binda, Pereverzeva, & Murray, 2013Mathôt, Dalmaijer, Grainger, & Van der Stigchel, 2014;Mathôt, van der Linden, Grainger, & Vitu, 2013), and perceptual brightness when the physical luminance is kept the same (Suzuki, Minami, Laeng, & Nakauchi, 2019;Laeng & Endestad, 2012). For instance, in Naber et al (2013), participants were asked to memorize various natural scene images presented one by one (memorization phase) to recall later in the retrieval phase.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attractiveness in the Eyes: A Possibility of Positive Loop between Transient Pupil Constriction and Facial Attraction

Liao

Kashino

Shimojo

2021

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contrary to the long-held belief of a close linkage between pupil dilation and attractiveness, we found an early and transient pupil constriction response when participants viewed an attractive face (and the effect of luminance/contrast is controlled). While human participants were making an attractiveness judgment on faces, their pupil constricted more for the more attractive (as-to-be-rated) faces. Further experiments showed that the effect of pupil constriction to attractiveness judgment extended to intrinsically esthetic visual objects such as natural scene images (as well as faces) but not to line-drawing geometric figures. When participants were asked to judge the roundness of faces, pupil constriction still correlated with their attractiveness but not the roundness rating score, indicating the automaticity of the pupil constriction to attractiveness. When pupillary responses were manipulated implicitly by relative background luminance changes (from the prestimulus screen), the facial attractiveness ratings were in accordance with the amount of pupil constriction, which could not be explained solely by simultaneous or sequential luminance contrast. The overall results suggest that pupil constriction not only reflects but, as a part of self-monitoring and attribution mechanisms, also possibly contributes to facial attractiveness implicitly.

show abstract

Attenuation of the pupillary response to luminance and color changes during interocular suppression

Cited by 14 publications

References 58 publications

Separable pupillary signatures of perception and action during perceptual multistability

Separable pupillary signatures of perception and action during perceptual multistability

Pupillometry: Psychology, Physiology, and Function

Attractiveness in the Eyes: A Possibility of Positive Loop between Transient Pupil Constriction and Facial Attraction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About