The effect of spatial frequency and field size on the spread of exclusive visibility in binocular rivalry

O’Shea, Robert P; Sims, Adam; Govan, Donovan G.

doi:10.1016/s0042-6989(96)00113-7

Cited by 74 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several experiments have reported that exclusivity (the amount of time spent in a stable percept) decreases as a function of stimulus size ( Figure 4A; Blake et al, 1992;O'Shea et al, 1997). We simulated this finding by manipulating the proportion of the retinal images occupied by the stimuli.…”

Section: Piecemeal Rivalry and Traveling Wavesmentioning

confidence: 93%

Multistability and Perceptual Inference

Gershman

Vul

Tenenbaum³

2012

Neural Computation

129

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ambiguous images present a challenge to the visual system: how can uncertainty about the causes of visual inputs be represented when there are multiple equally plausible causes? A Bayesian ideal observer should represent uncertainty in the form of a posterior probability distribution over causes. However, in many real-world situations, computing this distribution is intractable and requires some form of approximation. We argue that the visual system approximates the posterior over underlying causes with a set of samples and that this approximation strategy produces perceptual multistabilitystochastic alternation between percepts in consciousness. Under our analysis, multistability arises from a dynamic sample-generating process that explores the posterior through stochastic diffusion, implementing a rational form of approximate Bayesian inference known as Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC). We examine in detail the most extensively studied form of multistability, binocular rivalry, showing how a variety of experimental phenomena-Gamma-like stochastic switching, patchy percepts, fusion, and traveling waves-can be understood in terms of MCMC sampling over simple graphical models of the underlying perceptual tasks. We conjecture that the stochastic nature of spiking neurons may lend itself to implementing sample-based posterior approximations in the brain.

show abstract

Section: Piecemeal Rivalry and Traveling Wavesmentioning

confidence: 93%

Multistability and Perceptual Inference

Gershman

Vul

Tenenbaum³

2012

Neural Computation

129

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3). The purpose of these observations was to ask whether the variables, both of which are known to influence the alternation rate in binocular rivalry (8,13; see also below), affect the alternation rates measured in normal binocular view. Changing these parameters does indeed affect the rate in normal view.…”

Section: Fluctuations In Perception During Normal Binocular Viewingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Similarities in normal and binocularly rivalrous viewing

Andrews

Purves

1997

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

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We report here a series of observationsmost of which the reader can experience directly-showing that distinct components of patterned visual stimuli (orthogonal lines of a different hue) vary in perception as sets. Although less frequent and often less complete, these perceptual f luctuations in normal viewing are otherwise similar to the binocular rivalry experienced when incompatible scenes are presented dichoptically.The mechanism of normal vision is generally thought to entail binocular cortical neurons that unite the information generated by each eye in a common stream that eventually leads to perception. The success of this conception is best exemplified by present understanding of stereopsis, which depends on the convergence of monocular information onto disparitysensitive binocular neurons that generate (or at least initiate) a sensation of depth (1, 2). This interpretation of visual processing, however, is not easily reconciled with the experience that arises when two eyes are independently stimulated with discrepant scenes. As Wheatstone (3) first demonstrated, if one stimulus pattern, e.g., vertical stripes, is presented to one eye and a discordant pattern, e.g., horizontal stripes, to the other eye, subjects experience binocular rivalry; in this circumstance, the same region of visual space is perceived as being occupied by vertical stripes or horizontal stripes, but rarely by both. If the two monocular streams were simply united, one would presumably see a grid. This dilemma has led to alternative explanations of visual processing predicated on the suppression of one or the other monocular view (4), or a routine alternation between the two monocular views (5, 6). Such propositions have not found wide acceptance and are in varying degrees incompatible with other evidence (7-9).Here we describe a series of observations that suggests a resolution of this conflicting evidence; namely, that all viewing conditions entail a potential competition between sets of distinguishable qualities in the visual scene. If this assertion is correct, then rivalry and normal cyclopean vision are both manifestations of the same perceptual strategy. The results are presented in three categories. First, we demonstrate that when subjects foveate on a stimulus pattern in normal binocular view, elements that are differentiable as sets tend to fluctuate in visual perception. Second, we compare set competition in normal view to the more obvious competition experienced during binocular rivalry. Third, we show that when binocularly rivalrous stimuli are presented adjacent to similar nonrivalrous stimuli, the perceptual fluctuations in the two regions of the visual scene tend to occur together.The stimuli used in all these experiments were circumscribed patterns of lines (see Figs. 1, 4, and 5). Parameters that we might have varied to compare normal viewing and binocular rivalry include orientation, hue, motion, size, spatial frequency, shape, contrast, luminance, and disparity. For reasons of simplicity, we chose to vary l...

show abstract

“…In the fovea, the zone of suppression may be on the order of 10-15 arcmin 17 , which increases with eccentricity 18 , with the spatial scale (i.e., inversely with spatial frequency) of the stimulus 19,20 , and with decreasing light level 21 . Such zones of suppression within an eye may show synchronized alternations if the stimuli in the visual field possess a common configuration or a common color 22,23 , which suggests the existence of a cooperative network underlying the binocular rivalry process 13 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Factors that increase stimulus strength include: contour density 32 , luminance level 33 , contrast level 34 , middle spatial frequencies 34,35 , size 19 , and velocity 36,37 . In general, a stronger stimulus shows greater predominance during rivalry, where predominance is defined as the total proportion of time a stimulus is visible 13 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual suppression of monocularly presented symbology against a fused background in a simulation and training environment

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY)2. REPORT TYPE 3. DATES COVERED (From -To) SPONSORING / MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S)AFRL; AFRL/HEA SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT NUMBER(S)Air DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENTApproved for public release; distribution is unlimited. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTESThis paper was originally published in SPIE Vol. 6224, Helmet-and Head-mounted Displays XI (July 2006). ABSTRACTWhen wearing a monocular head-mounted display (HMD), one eye views the HMD symbology while both eyes view an out-the-window scene. This may create interocular differences in image characteristics that could disrupt binocular vision by provoking visual suppression, thus reducing visibility of the background scene, monocular symbology, or both. However, binocular fusion of the background scene may mitigate against the occurrence of visual suppression, a hypothesis that was investigated in the present study. Observers simultaneously viewed a static background scene and HMD symbology while performing a target recognition task under several viewing conditions. In a simulated HMD condition observers binocularly viewed a background scene with monocular symbology superimposed. In another condition, viewing was dichoptic (i.e. completely different images were presented to the left and right eyes). Additionally, one control condition was implemented for comparison. The results indicate that for continuously presented targets binocular rivalry did not have significant effects on target visibility. However, for briefly presented targets, binocular rivalry was shown to increase thresholds for target recognition time in HMD and dichoptic viewing conditions relative to the control. Impairment was less in the HMD condition. Thus, binocular fusion of a background scene can partially mitigate against the occurrence of visual suppression. However, some suppression still exists which occurs between monocular pathways. Implications for the integration of monocular HMDs into Air Force training environments will be discussed. SUBJECT TERMS ABSTRACTWhen wearing a monocular head-mounted display (HMD), one eye ...

show abstract

The effect of spatial frequency and field size on the spread of exclusive visibility in binocular rivalry

Cited by 74 publications

References 12 publications

Multistability and Perceptual Inference

Multistability and Perceptual Inference

Similarities in normal and binocularly rivalrous viewing

Visual suppression of monocularly presented symbology against a fused background in a simulation and training environment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About