Binocular rivalry produced by temporal frequency differences

Alais, David; Parker, Alison E.

doi:10.3389/fnhum.2012.00227

Cited by 12 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 94 publications

(158 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Last, our findings can be distinguished from those of Alais and Parker (2012), who used spatiotemporally filtered stimuli similar to ours in a binocular-rivalry paradigm. Their competing stimuli were matched for size, contrast, spatial frequency, and orientation content, so that the only difference between them was temporal frequency, which was carefully manipulated.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 39%

Strength of continuous flash suppression is optimal when target and masker modulation rates are matched

Han

Alais

2018

Journal of Vision

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Continuous flash suppression (CFS) is a popular technique whereby a dynamic sequence of Mondrian patterns is presented to one eye in order to suppress a static target presented to the other eye. Although the effectiveness of CFS is generally assumed to increase with the flicker rate of the Mondrian masker, a recent study has shown that suppression is optimal at very low masker rates for sustained targets, but higher rates may be necessary for transient targets. Here we vary the modulation rates of the masker and target using temporally filtered dynamic noise, which allowed us to examine the relationship between target and masker frequency and its effect on suppression strength. Using these carefully controlled, temporally narrowband stimuli, we demonstrate a pattern of results showing that suppression is greatest when target and masker modulate at similar frequencies. This finding indicates the involvement of early temporal-frequency-tuned filters underlying CFS and is consistent with many existing findings in the CFS literature. We also find that these temporally selective processes are orientation selective, which points to an early cortical substrate such as neurons in primary visual cortex. Overall, our study reveals that CFS suppression can be maximized by carefully matching the masker and target in temporal frequency and orientation. More generally, we show the importance of using carefully controlled stimuli for elucidating the underlying mechanisms of CFS. This approach is important at a theoretical level, as it will enable comparison of CFS with existing models of binocular rivalry and interocular suppression and facilitate a unified explanatory framework.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 39%

Strength of continuous flash suppression is optimal when target and masker modulation rates are matched

Han

Alais

2018

Journal of Vision

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recent studies show that nonvisual modalities, including audition (Sekuler et al, 1997;Kang and Blake, 2005;Munhall et al, 2009;van Ee et al, 2009;Conrad et al, 2010;Chen et al, 2011), touch Maruya et al, 2007;Holcombe and Seizova-Cajic, 2008;Alais et al, 2010b;Lunghi et al, 2010;Lunghi and Morrone, 2013), and olfaction (Zhou et al, 2010) modulate bistable visual alternations. This study uses temporal frequency rivalry (15 vs 3.75 Hz) to investigate whether auditory or tactile modulations (also 15 or 3.75 Hz) influence rivalry alternations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because only one image reaches conscious perception, with the other suppressed from awareness, binocular rivalry is used to investigate the neural correlates of perceptual ambiguity and visual awareness (Logothetis, 1998;Koch, 2007). Rivalry is usually induced by spatial conflict (e.g., orientation, color, or spatial frequency) (Yang et al, 1992;Kovács et al, 1996) or competing visual objects (Tong et al, 1998;Alais and Melcher, 2007;Baker and Graf, 2009). Recently, Alais and Parker (2012) showed that spatially matched random patterns rival vigorously when contrast-modulated at very different rates (e.g., factor of 4).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Resolving perceptual ambiguity is an important function of cross-modal interactions (Ernst and Bülthoff, 2004;Alais et al, 2010a;Klink et al, 2012). Recent studies show that nonvisual modalities, including audition (Sekuler et al, 1997;Kang and Blake, 2005;Munhall et al, 2009;van Ee et al, 2009;Conrad et al, 2010;Chen et al, 2011), touch Maruya et al, 2007;Holcombe and Seizova-Cajic, 2008;Alais et al, 2010b;Lunghi et al, 2010;Lunghi and Morrone, 2013), and olfaction (Zhou et al, 2010) modulate bistable visual alternations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Auditory and Tactile Signals Combine to Influence Vision during Binocular Rivalry

2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resolution of perceptual ambiguity is one function of cross-modal interactions. Here we investigate whether auditory and tactile stimuli can influence binocular rivalry generated by interocular temporal conflict in human subjects. Using dichoptic visual stimuli modulating at different temporal frequencies, we added modulating sounds or vibrations congruent with one or the other visual temporal frequency. Auditory and tactile stimulation both interacted with binocular rivalry by promoting dominance of the congruent visual stimulus. This effect depended on the cross-modal modulation strength and was absent when modulation depth declined to 33%. However, when auditory and tactile stimuli that were too weak on their own to bias binocular rivalry were combined, their influence over vision was very strong, suggesting the auditory and tactile temporal signals combined to influence vision. Similarly, interleaving discrete pulses of auditory and tactile stimuli also promoted dominance of the visual stimulus congruent with the supramodal frequency. When auditory and tactile stimuli were presented at maximum strength, but in antiphase, they had no influence over vision for low temporal frequencies, a null effect again suggesting audio-tactile combination. We also found that the cross-modal interaction was frequency-sensitive at low temporal frequencies, when information about temporal phase alignment can be perceptually tracked. These results show that auditory and tactile temporal processing is functionally linked, suggesting a common neural substrate for the two sensory modalities and that at low temporal frequencies visual activity can be synchronized by a congruent cross-modal signal in a frequency-selective way, suggesting the existence of a supramodal temporal binding mechanism.

show abstract

“…The stimuli differed only in the temporal frequency in which they modulated in contrast, one at 3.75 Hz and the other at 15 Hz. This type of binocular-rivalry stimulus is known to produce alternations in vision that are comparable to alternations caused by spatially dissimilar stimuli, such as those of a face and a house (Alais and Parker, 2012). During dichoptic viewing of the stimuli, Lunghi et al (2014) presented auditory, tactile, or auditory/tactile stimuli intermittently.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictive Coding Explains Auditory and Tactile Influences on Vision during Binocular Rivalry

Jack

Hacker

2014

J. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Binocular rivalry produced by temporal frequency differences

Cited by 12 publications

References 94 publications

Strength of continuous flash suppression is optimal when target and masker modulation rates are matched

Strength of continuous flash suppression is optimal when target and masker modulation rates are matched

Auditory and Tactile Signals Combine to Influence Vision during Binocular Rivalry

Predictive Coding Explains Auditory and Tactile Influences on Vision during Binocular Rivalry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About