What is Grouping during Binocular Rivalry?

Stuit, Sjoerd; Paffen, Chris; Smagt, Maarten J. van der; Verstraten, Frans A. J.

doi:10.3389/fnhum.2011.00117

Cited by 31 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 38 publications

(54 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…solid evidence for both kinds of contributions (32,(35)(36)(37)(38), and binocular rivalry is widely viewed as the culmination of neural events distributed over multiple stages of processing comprising feedforward and feedback connections (4). What the present results indicate is that during stimulus rivalry, just like during binocular rivalry, those stages include very early ones in which interocular competition transpires.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 53%

“…In our model, this situation arises through a difference between the two components in both their maximum strength and their time scale of decay during stimulus absence. Although it is not straightforward to arrive at estimates of these characteristics from empirical work, there is some evidence that between-eye iso-orientation suppression is indeed the stronger of the two (25,32). Regarding the crossover in strength for interrupted stimuli, an intriguing possibility is suggested by work that points to a type of within-eye inhibition that is strongest right after stimulus onset and for rapidly changing stimuli but becomes weaker during sustained stimulation (22,33).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A monocular contribution to stimulus rivalry

Brascamp

Sohn

Blake

2013

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

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When corresponding areas of the two eyes view dissimilar images, stable perception gives way to visual competition wherein perceptual awareness alternates between those images. Moreover, a given image can remain visually dominant for several seconds at a time even when the competing images are swapped between the eyes multiple times each second. This perceptual stability across eye swaps has led to the widespread belief that this unique form of visual competition, dubbed stimulus rivalry, is governed by eyeindependent neural processes at a purely binocular stage of cortical processing. We tested this idea by investigating the influence of stimulus rivalry on the buildup of the threshold elevation aftereffect, a form of contrast adaptation thought to transpire at early cortical stages that include eye-specific neural activity. Weaker threshold elevation aftereffects were observed when the adapting image was engaged in stimulus rivalry than when it was not, indicating diminished buildup of adaptation during stimulus-rivalry suppression. We then confirmed that this reduction occurred, in part, at eye-specific neural stages by showing that suppression of an image at a given moment specifically diminished adaptation associated with the eye viewing the image at that moment. Considered together, these results imply that eye-specific neural events at early cortical processing stages contribute to stimulus rivalry. We have developed a computational model of stimulus rivalry that successfully implements this idea.ambiguous stimuli | binocular rivalry | bistable perception | flicker-and-swap rivalry B inocular rivalry is a compelling form of perceptual bistability that is frequently touted as a potent tool for studying neural correlates of visual perception (1). In conventional binocular rivalry, an observer simultaneously views a dissimilar image with each eye for a prolonged period, resulting in a perceptual cycle during which the images alternately reach awareness for seconds at a time. In a highly influential paper, Logothetis et al. (2) demonstrated that yoking each image to a given eye is unnecessary. In a rivalry variant dubbed stimulus rivalry, the images are swapped rapidly and repetitively between the two eyes, yet periods of uninterrupted visibility still last several seconds, much longer than the brief durations that a given image is present in a given eye. This remarkable survival of image dominance across eye swaps is widely regarded as unassailable evidence that competition between eyeindependent neural representations, rather than between incompatible monocular neural signals, governs perception in stimulus rivalry (2-5). In this paper, we suggest a revision of this interpretation by demonstrating psychophysically that perception during stimulus rivalry is reflected in neural events at early, monocular processing stages and by presenting a concise computational model that includes competition between monocular representations as a key factor behind stimulus rivalry. Within the context of this model, the sus...

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 53%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A monocular contribution to stimulus rivalry

Brascamp

Sohn

Blake

2013

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

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This suggests a greater sensitivity to expansion. Although this result is not in line with our assumption, it is known that mutual interactions related to the relative feature content of the competing images affect binocular rivalry (Stuit, Cass, Paffen, & Alais, 2009;Stuit, Paffen, van der Smagt, & Verstraten, 2011). Such interactions could in turn affect the relative sensitivity to expanding and contracting optic flow, complicating the interpretation of the data.…”

Section: Introductioncontrasting

confidence: 70%

Visual Directional Anisotropy Does Not Mirror the Directional Anisotropy Apparent in Postural Sway

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.Presenting a large optic flow pattern to observers is likely to cause postural sway. However, directional anisotropies have been reported, in that contracting optic flow induces more postural sway than expanding optic flow. Recently, we showed that the biomechanics of the lower leg cannot account for this anisotropy (Holten, Donker, Verstraten, & van der Smagt, 2013, Experimental Brain Research, 228, 117-129). The question we address in the current study is whether differences in visual processing of optic flow directions, in particular the perceptual strength of these directions, mirrors the anisotropy apparent in postural sway. That is, can contracting optic flow be considered to be a perceptually stronger visual stimulus than expanding optic flow? In the current study we use a breaking continuous flash suppression paradigm where we assume that perceptually stronger visual stimuli will break the flash suppression earlier, making the suppressed optic flow stimulus visible sooner. Surprisingly, our results show the opposite, in that expanding optic flow is detected earlier than contracting optic flow.

show abstract

“…Our previous results demonstrated that image-based grouping can essentially be reduced to zero, while eye-based grouping remains strong when grating stimuli are used [17]. Specifically, in that study, we found an increase in dominance durations based image-content for cardinally oriented gratings, but not for diagonally oriented gratings.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 45%

Image-Based Grouping during Binocular Rivalry Is Dictated by Eye-Of-Origin

et al. 2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prolonged viewing of dichoptically presented images with different content results in perceptual alternations known as binocular rivalry. This phenomenon is thought to be the result of competition at a local level, where local rivalry zones interact to give rise to a single, global dominant percept. Certain perceived combinations that result from this local competition are known to last longer than others, which is referred to as grouping during binocular rivalry. In recent years, the phenomenon has been suggested to be the result of competition at both eye- and image-based processing levels, although the exact contribution from each level remains elusive. Here we use a paradigm designed specifically to quantify the contribution of eye- and image-based processing to grouping during rivalry. In this paradigm we used sine-wave gratings as well as upright and inverted faces, with and without binocular disparity-based occlusion. These stimuli and conditions were used because they are known to result in processing at different stages throughout the visual processing hierarchy. Specifically, more complex images were included in order to maximize the potential contribution of image-based grouping. In spite of this, our results show that increasing image complexity did not lead to an increase in the contribution of image-based processing to grouping during rivalry. In fact, the results show that grouping was primarily affected by the eye-of-origin of the image parts, irrespective of stimulus type. We suggest that image content affects grouping during binocular rivalry at low-level processing stages, where it is intertwined with eye-of-origin information.

show abstract

What is Grouping during Binocular Rivalry?

Cited by 31 publications

References 38 publications

A monocular contribution to stimulus rivalry

A monocular contribution to stimulus rivalry

Visual Directional Anisotropy Does Not Mirror the Directional Anisotropy Apparent in Postural Sway

Image-Based Grouping during Binocular Rivalry Is Dictated by Eye-Of-Origin

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About