Center-surround interactions in visual motion processing during binocular rivalry

When each eye is confronted with a dissimilar stimulus, the percept will generally alternate between the two. This phenomenon is known as binocular rivalry. Although binocular rivalry occurs at locations where targets overlap spatially, the area surrounding rivalrous targets can modulate their dominance. Here we show that during binocular rivalry of oppositely moving gratings, a surrounding grating moving in the same direction as one of the two leads to increased dominance of the opposite direction of motion in the center. This increased dominance of the opposite direction in the center was observed irrespective of the eye to which the surround was presented. Inspection of the results for different conditions reveals that the preference for the opposite direction of motion cannot be explained by a single mechanism operating beyond binocular fusion. We therefore suggest that this phenomenon is the outcome of center-surround interactions at multiple levels along the pathway of visual motion processing.     

Adaptive center-surround interactions in human vision revealed during binocular rivalry

We used binocular rivalry as a psychophysical probe to explore center-surround interactions in orientation, motion and color processing. Addition of the surround matching one of the rival targets dramatically altered rivalry dynamics. For all visual sub-modalities tested, predominance of the high-contrast rival target matched to the surround was greatly reduced-a result that disappeared at low contrast. At low contrast, addition of the surround boosted dominance of orientation and motion targets matched to the surround. This contrast-dependent modulation of center-surround interactions seems to be a general property of the visual system and may reflect an adaptive balance between surround suppression and spatial summation.     

The initial interactions underlying binocular rivalry require visual awareness

Current theories of binocular vision suggest that the neural processes that resolve interocular conflict do not involve a single brain region but occur at multiple stages of visual processing. Here, using an adaptation paradigm, we explore the initial mechanisms involved in selecting a stimulus for perceptual dominance during binocular rivalry. When one or both eyes briefly viewed an adapting grating stimulus prior to the presentation of the adapting grating to one eye and an orthogonal, non-adapted grating to the other eye, participants more often reported perceptual dominance of the non-adapted grating. Crowding reduced awareness of the adapting grating. On trials in which subjects were unaware of the orientation of the adaptor grating, there was no effect of the adaptor on perceived dominance during rivalry; participants were just as likely to report dominance of the adapted or non-adapted grating. This implies that the initial events in binocular rivalry involve later stages of visual processing.     

Compound binocular rivalry

Binocular rivalry was examined with random dot patterns consisting of three colours: red, green and grey. The microstructure of the patterns was defined by the individual dots, and the correspondence between the microstructures in the two eyes was manipulated. The macrostructures were defined by the distributions of red, green and grey dots over the displays, so that they consisted of orthogonally striped patterns. The degree of correspondence between the microstructures was varied in Expt 1, together with the spatial frequency of the microstructure. Rivalry periods of the macrostructures were briefer when the microstructures were in correspondence, In Expt 2 the spatial frequencies of the macrostructures were varied. The lower spatial frequency predominated for longer than the higher. The results are discussed in terms of independent pathways for corresponding and rivalry stimulation. In addition a stimulus pairing that produces clear dichoptic colour mixtures is presented.     

Stochastic resonance in binocular rivalry

When a different image is presented to each eye, visual awareness spontaneously alternates between the two images--a phenomenon called binocular rivalry. Because binocular rivalry is characterized by two marginally stable perceptual states and spontaneous, apparently stochastic, switching between them, it has been speculated that switches in perceptual awareness reflect a double-well-potential type computational architecture coupled with noise. To characterize this noise-mediated mechanism, we investigated whether stimulus input, neural adaptation, and inhibitory modulations (thought to underlie perceptual switches) interacted with noise in such a way that the system produced stochastic resonance. By subjecting binocular rivalry to weak periodic contrast modulations spanning a range of frequencies, we demonstrated quantitative evidence of stochastic resonance in binocular rivalry. Our behavioral results combined with computational simulations provided insights into the nature of the internal noise (its magnitude, locus, and calibration) that is relevant to perceptual switching, as well as provided novel dynamic constraints on computational models designed to capture the neural mechanisms underlying perceptual switching.     

Laughter abolishes binocular rivalry

Background : Binocular rivalry is an increasingly popular technique for the study of consciousness, which changes quasi‐regularly during rivalry, despite the unchanging sensory stimuli presented to each eye. For example, if a small patch of horizontal stripes is presented constantly to the fovea of one eye and a small patch of vertical stripes is similarly presented constantly to the fovea of the other eye, most subjects experience an alternation between stimuli rather than a simultaneous mixed percept of both. Methods : Binocular rivalry was induced, superimposed on normal viewing, using liquid crystal shutters and a short persistence monitor, which produced a one degree circular patch of horizontal gratings to the right eye and an identical patch of vertical gratings in the same location for the left eye. The subject signalled with key presses the three possible perceptual states that alternated with each other, namely horizontal, vertical and mixed percept (where horizontal and vertical were simultaneously visible). Results : The present study builds on an incidental observation that laughter stopped the rivalry alternations between horizontal and vertical and induced the mixed percept instead. A physical explanation for this effect was ruled out by using stabilised imagery in the form of retinal after‐images of the rivalling gratings. Under conditions of retinal stabilisation, laughter also produced the mixed percept. Conclusions : The results are discussed in the light of recent work that indicates the inadequacy of low‐level explanation of rivalry, with laughter being another complex multi‐level contribution to the neural basis of rivalry, along with other aspects of mood. The results are discussed in relation to the interesting literature on the neurology and postulated functions of laughter.     

Controlling binocular rivalry.

Binocular rivalry is the alternating perception that occurs when the two eyes are presented with incompatible stimuli. We have developed a new method for controlling binocular rivalry and measuring its progress. One eye views a static grating while the fellow eye views a grating that smoothly and cyclically varies between two orientations, one the same as the static grating and the other orthogonal. Contrast sensitivity was tested monocularly a number of times during the stimulus cycle. When the eye viewing the static grating was tested, sensitivity varied between maximum and minimum values as the conditioning stimulus varied from binocularly compatible to incompatible. The interocular suppression thus demonstrated was limited to the eye viewing the static grating; variations in the fellow eye's sensitivity were due to interocular masking alone.     

Local binocular fusion is involved in global binocular rivalry

We examined whether interocular inhibition in binocular rivalry could occur at the interocular intersection of horizontal and vertical rectangular patches which are locally fusible but globally rivalrous between the two eyes. We measured contrast increment (and decrement) thresholds of a monocularly presented probe which was presented on the horizontal patch corresponding to the intersection. We found that the threshold was higher when the horizontal patch was perceptually suppressed than when it was dominant. In addition, threshold elevation did not occur when both patches were dominant, or when the horizontal patch was viewed in isolation. These results indicate that interocular inhibition occurs at the potentially fusible region, and the determination of binocular fusion or binocular rivalry does not depend on physical stimulus but rather perceptual state at the time.     

Grouping and segmentation in binocular rivalry

Dichoptic presentation of dot arrays produces binocular rivalry if the arrays are of opposite contrast relative to background. Rivalry can occur even if individual dots in one eye's array do not overlap with the dots in the contralateral eye's array. The amount of unitary perception of only one array is a measure of the probability that the stimuli rival as textured surfaces rather than as portions of arrays or as individual dot elements. In accordance with Gestalt grouping principles, arrays of uniform brightness or color produced more unitary perception than mixed arrays. However, experiments with parametric variation of dot motion coherence suggested that segmentation mechanisms based on detection of collinearity can also influence perceptual selection and suppression in binocular rivalry.     

Minimal physiological conditions for binocular rivalry and rivalry memory

Binocular rivalry entails a perceptual alternation between incompatible stimuli presented to the two eyes. A minimal explanation for binocular rivalry involves strong competitive inhibition between neurons responding to different monocular stimuli to preclude simultaneous activity in the two groups. In addition, strong self-adaptation of dominant neurons is necessary to enable suppressed neurons to become dominant in turn. Here a minimal nonlinear neural model is developed incorporating inhibition, self-adaptation, and recurrent excitation. The model permits derivation of an equation for mean dominance duration as a function of the underlying physiological variables. The dominance duration equation incorporates an explicit representation of Levelt's second law. The same equation also shows that introduction of a simple compressive response nonlinearity can explain Levelt's fourth law. Finally, addition of brief, recurrent synaptic facilitation to the model generates properties of rivalry memory.     

Hysteresis effects in stereopsis and binocular rivalry

Neural hysteresis plays a fundamental role in stereopsis and reveals the existence of positive feedback at the cortical level [Wilson, H. R., & Cowan, J. D. (1973). A mathematical theory of the functional dynamics of cortical and thalamic nervous tissue. Kybernetik 13(2), 55-80]. We measured hysteresis as a function of orientation disparity in tilted gratings in which a transition is perceived between stereopsis and binocular rivalry. The patterns consisted of sinusoidal gratings with orientation disparities (0 degrees, 1 degrees, 2 degrees,..., 40 degrees) resulting in various degrees of tilt. A movie of these 41 pattern pairs was shown at a rate of 0.5, 1 or 2 pattern pairs per second, in forward or reverse order. Two transition points were measured: the point at which the single tilted grating appeared to split into two rivalrous gratings (T1), and the point at which two rivalrous gratings appeared to merge into a single tilted grating (T2). The transitions occurred at different orientation disparities (T1=25.4 degrees, T2=17.0 degrees) which was consistent with hysteresis and far exceeded the difference which could be attributed to reaction time. The results are consistent with a cortical model which includes positive feedback and recurrent inhibition between neural units representing different eyes and orientations.     

A physiological model of binocular rivalry

This paper presents a modified reciprocal inhibition model for the temporal dynamics of binocular rivalry. The model is based on neurophysiological mechanisms and is derived from human psychophysical data. A simple reciprocal inhibition oscillator may be described with a set of four coupled differential equations with a neurophysiological interpretation. However, such a circuit does not account for some aspects of the temporal behavior of binocular rivalry, including the effects of contrast change on alternation rate and on the magnitudes of changes in duration of the suppressed and dominant phases. To better account for these phenomena, the equations and their stimulation are modified to include three new components: (1) presynaptic inhibition of the reciprocal inhibition by the input, (2) the motor delays that occur when a human observer tracks rivalry and (3) a minimum threshold for each neuron's state variable. The result is a much improved fit to psychophysically-obtained data on the temporal behavior of binocular rivalry. Finally, the model is incorporated into a larger model to suggest how rivalry might occur in a network that usually exhibits binocular fusion.     

Center-surround inhibition deepens binocular rivalry suppression

When dissimilar stimuli are presented to each eye, perception alternates between both images--a phenomenon known as binocular rivalry. It has been shown that stimuli presented in proximity of rival targets modulate the time each target is perceptually dominant. For example, presenting motion to the region surrounding the rival targets decreases the predominance of the same-direction target. Here, using a stationary concentric grating rivaling with a drifting grating, we show that a drifting surround grating also increases the depth of binocular rivalry suppression, as measured by sensitivity to a speed discrimination probe on the rival grating. This was especially so when the surround moved in the same direction as the grating, and was slightly weaker for opposed directions. Suppression in both cases was deeper than a no-surround control condition. We hypothesize that surround suppression often observed in area MT (V5)-a visual area implicated in visual motion perception-is responsible for this increase in suppression. In support of this hypothesis, monocular and binocular surrounds were both effective in increasing suppression depth, as were surrounds contralateral to the probed eye. Static and orthogonal motion surrounds failed to add to the depth of rivalry suppression. These results implicate a higher-level, fully binocular area whose surround inhibition provides an additional source of suppression which sums with rivalry suppression to effectively deepen suppression of an unseen rival target.     

Subjective contours and binocular rivalry suppression

Binocular rivalry probably involves distributed neural processes, some responsible for dominance, others for suppression and still others for fluctuations in perception. Focusing on the suppression process, the present study asks whether neural events underlying rivalry suppression take place prior to, or subsequent to those underlying the synthesis of subjective contours. Specifically, we examined whether (i) a subjective contour could prematurely return a suppressed target to dominance and (ii) whether suppression of a Kanizsa-type inducer precludes the formation of a subjective contour. Suppression durations were not abbreviated by the subjective contour, but suppression did prevent the formation of a subjective contour. Evidently suppression precedes the synthesis of subjective contours in the visual processing hierarchy.     

Monocular analogues to binocular contour rivalry

Monocular phenomenological analogues to binocular contour rivalry were demonstrated with after-images. Evidence was presented that the term “contour rivalry” is justified for the monocular analogue. Monocular contour rivalry seems to be a cortical phenomenon as is binocular contour rivalry. Intersection of contours may develop in a monocular after-image by filling-in of contours. The filling-in alternates as the contour dominance alternates. In binocular and in monocular contour rivalry halos of suppression are observed which have similar dimensions under similar conditions.     

Grouping visual features during binocular rivalry

During binocular rivalry, portions of one eye's view may be perceptually dominant while other portions are suppressed; at any given moment, overall dominance often resembles a patchwork mixture of the two eyes' views. This study investigates the potency of two Gestalt grouping cues--good continuation and common fate--to promote synchronous fluctuations in dominance of two, spatially separated rival targets. Two grating patches were presented to the left eye paired dichoptically with random-dot patches presented to corresponding right eye locations. The orientations of the two gratings were either collinear, parallel or orthogonal. Gratings underwent contrast modulations that were either correlated (identical contrast changes) or uncorrelated (independent contrast changes). Over 60 s trials, observers pressed one key when the left grating predominated, another when the right grating predominated and both keys when both were concurrently visible. Correlated contrast modulation promoted joint grating predominance relative to the uncorrelated conditions, an effect strongest for collinear gratings. Joint predominance depended strongly on the angular separation between gratings and the temporal phase-lag in contrast modulations. These findings may reflect neural interactions subserved by lateral connections between cortical hypercolumns.     

Rival ideas about binocular rivalry.

Binocular rivalry has been used to investigate neural correlates of visual awareness. For this investigation to succeed, however, it is necessary to know what rivals during binocular rivalry. Recent work has raised questions about whether rivalry is between eyes or between stimuli. We find that stimulus rivalry occurs only within a limited range of spatial and temporal parameters--otherwise eye rivalry dominates.     

Endogenous attention prolongs dominance durations in binocular rivalry

We investigated the effects of attention on dominance durations during binocular rivalry. In a series of three experiments, observers performed several tasks while viewing rival stimuli to ensure and control deployment of attention. We found that endogenous attention can prolong dominance durations of attended stimulus. We developed a novel single-task procedure where observer's responses in an attentional task were used to objectively estimate dominance durations of the attended stimulus. Using this procedure, we showed that paying attention to the stimulus features involved in rivalry is necessary for prolonging dominance durations--mere engagement of attention during rivalry was insufficient. Finally, we were able to simulate the effects of endogenous attention by doubling the contrast of the attended stimulus while it was dominant. Attention may increase the apparent contrast of the attended stimulus, thereby prolonging its dominance duration. Overall, our results indicate that dominance durations in rivalry can be prolonged when observers are performing an attentionally demanding task on the rival stimulus.