The Dependence of Monocular Rivalry on Orientation

Campbell, F. W.; Gilinsky, Alberta S.; Howell, E.R.; Riggs, Lorrin A.; Atkinson, Janette

doi:10.1068/p020123

Cited by 67 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…2.00 ... Crassini and Broerse (1982) have suggestedthat because monocular pattern alternation can occur in the absence of eye movements (Crassini & Broerse, 1982) and when negative afterimages are minimized (Mapperson, Bowling, & Lovegrove, 1982), a more parsimonious explanation is in terms of antagonistic neural interactions between orientation channels (Campbell & Howell, 1972;Campbell et al, 1973;Kitterle et al, 1974;Thomas, 1977). The results of the present experiments and those of Kitterle et al (1974) can be understood in terms of this model the H-V condition and the 0-0 condition.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 54%

“…If reversals did depend upon afterimages, one would expect a decrease in reversal rate with decreases in contrast (Corwin, Volpe, & Tyler, 1976). Furthermore, the finding by Campbell et al (1973) showing that alternation rate is similar for stationary and rotating patterns seriously casts doubt upon the afterimage hypothesis. Finally, the finding that rivalry is obtained when the stimulus pattern is an afterimage of a grid (Crassini & Broerse, 1982;Sindermann & Luddeke, 1972) weakens the eyemovement/afterimage theory (Georgeson & Phillips, 1980 4.00 6.00 8.00…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Monocular pattern alternation: Effects of mean luminance and contrast

Kitterle

Kaye

1984

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Monocular pattern alternation refers to the changes over time in the apparent contrast of the components of a pattern formed by superimposing two sinusoidal gratings. In Experiment 1, alternation rate was measured as a function of the orientation, spatial frequency, and mean luminance of the pattern. Experiment 2 determined pattern alternation rate as a function of orientation, spatial frequency, and contrast. For both experiments, alternation was greater for patterns whose components were horizontal and vertical than for patterns whose components were obliquely oriented. These differences were more pronounced at intermediate than at high and low spatial frequencies. With decreases in mean luminance, there was a decline in both the rate of alternation and the differences in rate due to orientation. There was no significant effect of contrast upon alternation rate. Experiment 3 determined the effects of viewing time upon pattern alternation. For both horizontal-vertical and oblique patterns, the frequency of alternation increased with time up to 100-200 sec and then leveled off. However, the rate of increase with time was greater for horizontal-vertical patterns. These results were discussed in terms of the antagonistic interaction between channels tuned to spatial frequency and orientation.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 54%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

Monocular pattern alternation: Effects of mean luminance and contrast

Kitterle

Kaye

1984

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2B), observers can sometimes experience weak perceptual alternations [monocular rivalry (66)]. The model can capture this effect by adjusting the strength of attention to a value above the gray dashed lines in Figs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attention model of binocular rivalry

Rankin

Rinzel

et al. 2017

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When the corresponding retinal locations in the two eyes are presented with incompatible images, a stable percept gives way to perceptual alternations in which the two images compete for perceptual dominance. As perceptual experience evolves dynamically under constant external inputs, binocular rivalry has been used for studying intrinsic cortical computations and for understanding how the brain regulates competing inputs. Converging behavioral and EEG results have shown that binocular rivalry and attention are intertwined: binocular rivalry ceases when attention is diverted away from the rivalry stimuli. In addition, the competing image in one eye suppresses the target in the other eye through a pattern of gain changes similar to those induced by attention. These results require a revision of the current computational theories of binocular rivalry, in which the role of attention is ignored. Here, we provide a computational model of binocular rivalry. In the model, competition between two images in rivalry is driven by both attentional modulation and mutual inhibition, which have distinct selectivity (feature vs. eye of origin) and dynamics (relatively slow vs. relatively fast). The proposed model explains a wide range of phenomena reported in rivalry, including the three hallmarks: (i) binocular rivalry requires attention; (ii) various perceptual states emerge when the two images are swapped between the eyes multiple times per second; (iii) the dominance duration as a function of input strength follows Levelt's propositions. With a bifurcation analysis, we identified the parameter space in which the model's behavior was consistent with experimental results.B inocular rivalry is a visual phenomenon in which perception alternates between incompatible monocular images presented to the two eyes. During binocular rivalry, perceptual experience evolves dynamically while the external inputs are held constant. Binocular rivalry thereby provides an opportunity to gain insights about the intrinsic cortical computations underlying visual perception (1, 2).In conventional models of binocular rivalry, the competition between two percepts has been characterized as mutual inhibition between two populations of neurons selective for each of the two stimuli (3-11). Notwithstanding the differences in their details, these models consider the neural processing underlying binocular rivalry to be an automatic process. These models predict, therefore, that the dynamics of binocular rivalry are influenced mainly by bottom-up sensory inputs.Converging experimental evidence has shown, however, that binocular rivalry also depends on attention (for a review, see ref.12). First, EEG has been used to measure a neural correlate of the perceptual alternations during binocular rivalry when observers pay attention to the rival stimuli (13). However, this rivalry-induced modulation of the EEG signal is largely or entirely eliminated when attention is diverted away from the stimuli (14). Second, behavioral experiments comparing the perceptual cons...

show abstract

“…EXPERIMENT 2: EFFECT OF ORIENTATION There appears to be a difference in the way orientation influences monocular alternation and binocular rivalry. Monocular pattern alternation increases continuously as the angular separation between a vertical and variable grating increases up to 60 deg (Campbell, Gilinsky, Howell, Riggs, & Atkinson, 1973). Wade (1975) found that binocular rivalry was insensitive to orientational differences.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of spatial frequency, orientation, and color upon binocular rivalry and monocular pattern alternation

Kitterle

Thomas

1980

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether or not monocular and binocular rivalry are mediated by the same mechanism. The question was approached by examining, in a series of two experiments, the spatial frequency and orientation tuning characteristics for both forms of rivalry, as well as the effects of color upon monocular and binocular rivalry. The results of Experiment 1 indicate that binocular rivalry is insensitive to spatial frequency and color. In Experiment 2, the effects of spatial frequency and orientation were examined. The results of this experiment indicate that binocular rivalry is less sensitive to changes in orientation than is monocular alternation. There is no effect of color upon binocular rivalry. It was concluded that monocular alternation and binocular rivalry are mediated by different mechanisms ..

show abstract

The Dependence of Monocular Rivalry on Orientation

Cited by 67 publications

References 11 publications

Monocular pattern alternation: Effects of mean luminance and contrast

Monocular pattern alternation: Effects of mean luminance and contrast

Attention model of binocular rivalry

The effects of spatial frequency, orientation, and color upon binocular rivalry and monocular pattern alternation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About