Binocular rivalry properties for contrast-modulated (CM) gratings were examined to gain insight into their locus of processing. Two orthogonally orientated gratings were presented, one to each eye. Perceptual change rates, proportions of exclusivity and mixed percepts, and mean durations were calculated. Stimuli were noiseless luminance-defined (L), luminance-modulated noise (LM) and contrast-modulated noise (CM) gratings with sizes of 1, 2 and 4deg and spatial frequencies of 4, 2 and 1c/deg, respectively. For the LM and CM gratings, binary noise was fully correlated between eyes. Maximum producible modulations were used (1.0 for CM, 0.78 for LM and 0.98 for L stimuli). In a control experiment, contrasts of LM gratings were reduced until the multiples over detection threshold were similar to those of CM stimuli. Trial durations of 120s were analyzed. Exclusive visibility decreased with increasing stimulus size regardless of the stimulus type. Even with visibilities at similar multiples above detection threshold, significantly lower proportions of exclusive percepts and perceptual changes were found for CM, compared to LM gratings. The results obtained with dichoptically presented orthogonal CM gratings are significantly different from those obtained for orthogonal gratings presented to one eye. CM stimuli therefore do engage in binocular rivalry but with different characteristics to those found for LM stimuli. These results suggest that CM stimuli are processed by a mechanism that promotes binocular combination rather than rivalry, and therefore may involve cells in a higher visual area than those that initially process LM information.
Luminance-modulated noise (LM) and contrast-modulated noise (CM) gratings were presented with interocularly correlated, uncorrelated and anti-correlated binary noise to investigate their contributions to mixed percepts, specifically piecemeal and superimposition, during binocular rivalry. Stimuli were sine-wave gratings of 2 c/deg presented within 2 deg circular apertures. The LM stimulus contrast was 0.1 and the CM stimulus modulation depth was 1.0, equating to approximately 5 and 7 times detection threshold, respectively. Twelve 45 s trials, per noise configuration, were carried out. Fifteen participants with normal vision indicated via button presses whether an exclusive, piecemeal or superimposed percept was seen. For all noise conditions LM stimuli generated more exclusive visibility, and lower proportions of superimposition. CM stimuli led to greater proportions and longer periods of superimposition. For both stimulus types, correlated interocular noise generated more superimposition than did anti- or uncorrelated interocular noise. No significant effect of stimulus type (LM vs CM) or noise configuration (correlated, uncorrelated, anti-correlated) on piecemeal perception was found. Exclusive visibility was greater in proportion, and perceptual changes more numerous, during binocular rivalry for CM stimuli when interocular noise was not correlated. This suggests that mutual inhibition, initiated by non-correlated noise CM gratings, occurs between neurons processing luminance noise (first-order component), as well as those processing gratings (second-order component). Therefore, first- and second-order components can contribute to overall binocular rivalry responses. We suggest the addition of a new well to the current energy landscape model for binocular rivalry that takes superimposition into account.
Incompatible patterns viewed by each of the two eyes can provoke binocular rivalry, a competition of perception. Levelt’s first law predicts that a highly visible stimulus will predominate over a less visible stimulus during binocular rivalry. In a behavioural study, we made a counterintuitive observation: high visibility patterns do not always predominate over low visibility patterns. Our results show that none of Levelt’s binocular rivalry laws hold when luminance-modulated (LM) patterns compete with contrast-modulated (CM) patterns. We discuss visual saliency, asymmetric feedback, and a combination of both as potential mechanisms to explain the CM versus LM findings. Competing orthogonal LM stimuli do follow Levelt’s laws, whereas only the first two laws hold for competing CM stimuli. The current results provide strong psychophysical evidence for the existence of separate processing stages for LM and CM stimuli.
Sensory differences between autism and neuro-typical populations are well-documented and have often been explained by either weak-central-coherence or excitation/inhibition-imbalance cortical theories. We tested these theories with perceptual multi-stability paradigms in which dissimilar images presented to each eye generate dynamic cyclopean percepts based on ongoing cortical grouping and suppression processes. We studied perceptual multi-stability with Interocular Grouping (IOG), which requires the simultaneous integration and suppression of image fragments from both eyes, and Conventional Binocular Rivalry (CBR), which only requires global suppression of either eye, in 17 autistic adults and 18 neurotypical participants. We used a Hidden-Markov-Model as tool to analyze the multistable dynamics of these processes. Overall, the dynamics of multi-stable perception were slower (i.e. there were longer durations and fewer transitions among perceptual states) in the autistic group compared to the neurotypical group for both IOG and CBR. The weighted Markovian transition distributions revealed key differences between both groups and paradigms. The results indicate overall lower levels of suppression and decreased levels of grouping in autistic than neurotypical participants, consistent with elements of excitation/inhibition imbalance and weak-central-coherence theories.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.