Pupil Dilation Reflects Task Relevance Prior to Search

Olmos-Solis, Katya; Loon, Anouk M. van; Olivers, Christian N. L.

doi:10.5334/joc.12

Cited by 12 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 69 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…the location in the visual field to which these neurons respond); next, they flashed a stimulus either within, or outside of, the stimulated RF. Crucially, they observed a stronger PLR to stimuli flashed within the stimulated RF, compared to outside of the stimulated RF—a result that echoes behavioral studies (notably Binda & Murray, 2015; Olmos-Solis et al, 2018).…”

Section: The Pupil Light Responsementioning

confidence: 55%

“…Crucially, the color of this probe either matched, or did not match, the memorized color. Olmos-Solis et al (2018) found that the pupil constricted more in response to memory-matching as compared to non-matching probes; in other words, when a stimulus matches the contents of visual working memory, it triggers a stronger PLR. This finding is again mediated by visual attention; more specifically, it is mediated by the fact that stimuli that match the contents of visual working memory tend to capture attention (e.g.…”

Section: The Pupil Light Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

“…More recently, it has been shown that covert visual attention also modulates the PLR (Binda & Murray, 2015; Binda et al, 2013a; Binda, Pereverzeva, & Murray, 2014; Bombeke et al, 2016; Ebitz, Pearson, & Platt, 2014; Mathôt, Dalmaijer, Grainger, & Van der Stigchel, 2014a; Mathôt et al, 2013; Naber, Alvarez, & Nakayama, 2013; Olmos-Solis, van Loon, & Olivers, 2018; Unsworth & Robison, 2016). For example, in one of our own experiments, participants fixated their gaze in the center of a display that was bright on one side, and dark on the other side (Mathôt et al, 2013).…”

Section: The Pupil Light Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Olmos-Solis et al (2018) used a different approach to probe visual working memory through pupillometry. In their study, participants memorized a color, which defined the target stimulus during a subsequent visual-search task.…”

Section: The Pupil Light Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

“…To test whether a memory representation of brightness or darkness also triggers a PLR, we conducted another series of experiments in which we asked participants to memorize either bright or dark stimuli (Blom, Mathôt, Olivers, & Van der Stigchel, 2016); that is, rather than asking participants to memorize a location on a continuously visible bright or dark background (Fabius et al, 2017) or measuring the pupil response to a probe (Olmos-Solis et al, 2018), we asked participants to memorize bright or dark objects that were subsequently removed from the display, such that any differences in pupil size would necessarily be driven by the memory trace. However—and somewhat to our own surprise—we found no evidence that, after the stimuli had been removed from the display, maintaining bright or dark stimuli in working memory affected pupil size.…”

Section: The Pupil Light Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Pupillometry: Psychology, Physiology, and Function

Mathôt

2018

Journal of Cognition

564

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

Section: The Pupil Light Responsementioning

confidence: 55%

Section: The Pupil Light Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Pupil Light Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Pupil Light Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Pupil Light Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Pupillometry: Psychology, Physiology, and Function

Mathôt

2018

Journal of Cognition

564

548

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Functional benefits of cognitively driven pupil‐size changes

Vilotijević,

Mathôt

2023

WIRES Cognitive Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pupil‐size changes are typically associated with the pupil light response (PLR), where they are driven by the physical entry of light into the eye. However, pupil‐size changes are also influenced by various cognitive processes, where they are driven by higher‐level cognition. For example, the strength of the PLR is not solely affected by physical properties of the light but also by cognitive factors, such as whether the source of light is attended or not, which results in an increase or decrease in the strength of the PLR. Surprisingly, although cognitively driven pupil‐size changes have been the focus of extensive research, their possible functions are rarely discussed. Here we consider the relative (dis)advantages of small versus large pupils in different situations from a theoretical point of view, and compare these to empirical results showing how pupil size actually changes in these situations. Based on this, we suggest that cognitively driven pupil‐size changes optimize vision either through preparation, embodied representations, or a differential emphasis on central or peripheral vision. More generally, we argue that cognitively driven pupil‐size changes are a form of sensory tuning: a subtle adjustment of the eyes to optimize vision for the current situation and the immediate future.This article is categorized under: Neuroscience > Cognition Neuroscience > Physiology Neuroscience > Behavior

show abstract

Aversive Conditioning of Spatial Position Sharpens Neural Population-level Tuning in Visual Cortex and Selectively Reduces Alpha-band Activity

Friedl

Keil

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Processing capabilities for many low-level visual features are experientially malleable, aiding sighted organisms in adapting to dynamic environments. Explicit instructions to attend a specific visual field location influence retinotopic visuocortical activity, amplifying responses to stimuli appearing at cued spatial positions. It remains undetermined, however, both how such prioritization affects surrounding non-prioritized locations, and if a given retinotopic spatial position can attain enhanced cortical representation through experience rather than instruction. This work examined visuocortical response changes as human observers learned, through differential classical conditioning, to associate specific on-screen locations with aversive outcomes. Using dense-array EEG and pupillometry, we tested the pre-registered hypotheses of either sharpening or generalization around an aversively associated location following a single conditioning session. Specifically, competing hypotheses tested if mean response changes would take the form of a gaussian (generalization) or difference-of-gaussian (sharpening) distribution over spatial positions, peaking at the viewing location paired with a noxious noise. Occipital 15 Hz steady-state visual evoked potential (ssVEP) responses were selectively heightened when viewing aversively paired locations and displayed a non-linear, difference-of-gaussian profile across neighboring locations, consistent with suppressive surround modulation of non-prioritized positions. Measures of alpha band (8 – 12.8 Hz) activity and pupil diameter also exhibited selectively heightened responses to noise-paired locations but did not evince any difference across the non-paired locations. These results indicate that visuocortical spatial representations are sharpened in response to location-specific aversive conditioning, while top-down influences indexed by alpha power reduction exhibit all-or-none modulation.Significance StatementIt is increasingly recognized that early visual cortex is not a static processor of physical features, but is instead constantly shaped by perceptual experience. It remains unclear, however, to what extent the cortical representation of many fundamental features, including visual field location, is malleable by experience. Using EEG and an aversive classical conditioning paradigm, we observed sharpening of visuocortical responses to stimuli appearing at aversively associated locations along with location-selective facilitation of response systems indexed by pupil diameter and EEG alpha power. These findings highlight the experience-dependent flexibility of retinotopic spatial representations in visual cortex, opening avenues towards novel treatment targets in disorders of attention and spatial cognition.

show abstract

Pupil Dilation Reflects Task Relevance Prior to Search

Cited by 12 publications

References 69 publications

Pupillometry: Psychology, Physiology, and Function

Pupillometry: Psychology, Physiology, and Function

Functional benefits of cognitively driven pupil‐size changes

Aversive Conditioning of Spatial Position Sharpens Neural Population-level Tuning in Visual Cortex and Selectively Reduces Alpha-band Activity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About