Tilt aftereffect following adaptation to translational Glass patterns

Pavan, Andrea; Hocketstaller, Johanna; Contillo, Adriano; Greenlee, Mark W.

doi:10.1038/srep23567

Cited by 12 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 82 publications

(181 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These results are in agreement with previous human brain imaging studies that reported higher selectivity for static translational GPs at lower level of visual processing (Mannion et al, 2010(Mannion et al, , 2009Ostwald et al, 14 2008). The static GP results are also consistent with our previous findings that adaptation to static GPs induces a tilt-aftereffect similar to that produced using gratings, suggesting that adaptation to static oriented GPs is likely to tap low-level orientation selective mechanisms (Pavan et al, 2016). The results with static GPs also indicate that V5/MT is not involved in the extraction of global form, but it does seem to be involved in the extraction of the motion information from dynamic GPs: For dynamic GPs, rTMS affected the observers' performance when delivered over the cortical area V5/MT.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…The visual system extracts complex spatial form by integrating many local orientation signals (Kourtzi et al, 2008;Krekelberg et al, 2003;Mannion et al, 2010Mannion et al, , 2009Murray et al, 2003;Or et al, 2010;Pavan et al, 2016;Ross et al, 2000). Stationary Glass patterns (GPs;Glass, 1969) represent a valid tool to investigate this integration process (Wilson and Wilkinson, 1998).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Stationary Glass patterns (GPs;Glass, 1969) represent a valid tool to investigate this integration process (Wilson and Wilkinson, 1998). Static GPs contain randomly distributed dot pairs (dipoles), whose orientations are determined by certain geometric transforms and convey the perception of either oriented or complex spatially distributed structures (Barlow and Olshausen, 2004;Clifford and Weston, 2005;Dakin, 1997;Dakin and Bex, 2001;Glass and Pérez, 1973;Glass and Switkes, 1976;Pavan et al, 2016;Wilson et al, 1997;Wilson and Wilkinson, 1998).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The neural basis of form and form-motion integration from static and dynamic translational Glass patterns: A rTMS investigation

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A long-held view of the visual system is that form and motion are independently analysed. However, there is physiological and psychophysical evidence of early interaction in the processing of form and motion. In this study, we used a combination of Glass patterns (GPs) and repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) to investigate in human observers the neural mechanisms underlying form-motion integration. GPs consist of randomly distributed dot pairs (dipoles) that induce the percept of an oriented stimulus. GPs can be either static or dynamic. Dynamic GPs have both a form component (i.e., orientation) and a non-directional motion component along the orientation axis. GPs were presented in two temporal intervals and observers were asked to discriminate the temporal interval containing the most coherent GP. rTMS was delivered over early visual area (V1/V2) and over area V5/MT shortly after the presentation of the GP in each interval. The results showed that rTMS applied over early visual areas affected the perception of static GPs, but the stimulation of area V5/MT did not affect observers' performance. On the other hand, rTMS was delivered over either V1/V2 or V5/MT strongly impaired the perception of dynamic GPs. These results suggest that early visual areas seem to be involved in the processing of the spatial structure of GPs, and interfering with the extraction of the global spatial structure also affects the extraction of the motion component, possibly interfering with early form-motion integration. However, visual area V5/MT is likely to be involved only in the processing of the motion component of dynamic GPs. These results suggest that motion and form cues may interact as early as V1/V2.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The neural basis of form and form-motion integration from static and dynamic translational Glass patterns: A rTMS investigation

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Contrarily to the Gain model, exposure to oriented stimuli inhibited the response of low-level units centered onto the same and nearby orientations. This, in turn, biased the population response to an incoming stimulus away from the present orientation 43,44 , resembling negative aftereffects observed after both brief and prolonged adaptation periods [45][46][47] . The critical aspect of the Two-process model was the plasticity at the level of decisional weights.…”

Section: < Insertmentioning

confidence: 85%

Laws of concatenated perception: Vision goes for novelty, Decisions for perseverance

Pascucci

Mancuso

Santandrea

et al. 2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Every instant of perception depends on a cascade of brain processes calibrated to the history of sensory and decisional events. In the present work, we show that human visual perception is constantly shaped by two contrasting forces, exerted by sensory adaptation and past decisions. In a series of experiments, we used multilevel modelling and cross-validation approaches to investigate the impact of previous stimuli and responses on current errors in adjustment tasks. Our results revealed that each perceptual report is permeated by opposite biases from a hierarchy of serially dependent processes: low-level adaptation repels perception away from previous stimuli; high-level, decisional traces attract perceptual reports toward previous responses. Contrary to recent claims, we demonstrated that positive serial dependence does not result from continuity fields operating at the level of early visual processing, but arises from the inertia of decisional templates. This finding is consistent with a Two-process model of serial dependence in which the persistence of read-out weights in a decision unit compensates for sensory adaptation, leading to attractive biases in sequential responses. We propose the first unified account of serial dependence in which functionally distinct mechanisms, operating at different stages, promote the differentiation and integration of visual information over time.not peer-reviewed)

show abstract

“…More recently, a human brain imaging study by Apthorp et al (2013) showed that motion streaks are likely to be extracted at early stages of visual analysis, implying that motion and form, while seemingly separate, are processed and combined as early as the primary visual cortex. In addition, there is brain imaging and psychophysical evidence that early visual areas can encode and pool the sparse local orientation cues in translational GPs (Ohla et al, 2005;Ostwald et al, 2008;Mannion et al, 2009Mannion et al, , 2010Pavan et al, 2016).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The interaction between orientation and motion signals in moving oriented Glass patterns

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous psychophysical evidence suggests that motion and orientation processing systems interact asymmetrically in the human visual system, with orientation information having a stronger influence on the perceived motion direction than vice-versa. To investigate the mechanisms underlying this motion-form interaction we used moving and oriented Glass patterns (GPs), which consist of randomly distributed dot pairs (dipoles) that induce the percept of an oriented texture. In Experiment 1 we varied the angle between dipole orientation and motion direction (conflict angle). In separate sessions participants either judged the orientation or motion direction of the GP. In addition, the spatiotemporal characteristics of dipole motion were manipulated as a way to limit (Experiment 1) or favour (Experiment 2) the availability of orientation signals from motion (motion streaks). The results of Experiment 1 showed that apparent GP motion direction is attracted towards dipole orientation, and apparent GP orientation is repulsed from GP motion. The results of Experiment 2 showed stronger repulsion effects when judging the GP orientation, but stronger motion streaks from the GP motion can dominate over the signals provided by conflicting dipole orientation. These results are consistent with the proposal that two separate mechanisms contribute to our perception of stimuli which contain conflicting orientation and motion information: (i) perceived GP motion is mediated by spatial motion-direction sensors, in which signals from motion sensors are combined with excitatory input from orientationtuned sensors tuned to orientations parallel to the axis of GP motion, (ii) perceived GP orientation is mediated by orientation-tuned sensors which mutually inhibit each other. The two mechanisms are revealed by the different effects of conflict angle and dipole lifetime on perceived orientation and motion direction.

show abstract

Tilt aftereffect following adaptation to translational Glass patterns

Cited by 12 publications

References 82 publications

The neural basis of form and form-motion integration from static and dynamic translational Glass patterns: A rTMS investigation

The neural basis of form and form-motion integration from static and dynamic translational Glass patterns: A rTMS investigation

Laws of concatenated perception: Vision goes for novelty, Decisions for perseverance

The interaction between orientation and motion signals in moving oriented Glass patterns

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About