Early binding of feature pairs for visual perception

Holcombe, Alex O.; Cavanagh, Patrick

doi:10.1038/83945

Cited by 136 publications

(137 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

113

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A well-known exception of slow cross-attribute binding is the colour-orientation binding at the same locationthe temporal limit of binding colour and orientation is much higher than 2 -3 Hz when they are presented at the same location (Holcombe & Cavanagh 2001;Bodelon et al 2007). The rapid colour -orientation binding is unlikely to reflect a general facilitation effect of spatial coincidence on cross-attribute binding, since the temporal limit of colour -motion binding is low even when they are presented at the same location (Arnold 2005 early neural mechanism that directly encodes the relationship between a specific attribute pair.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In comparison with these, the reported temporal limits for cross-attribute phase judgements are much lower (less than approx. 10 Hz) (Holcombe & Cavanagh 2001;Arnold 2005;Fujisaki & Nishida 2005, 2007, 2009; Bartels & Zeki 2006;Amano et al 2007;Holcombe & Judson 2007). One could interpret these low temporal limits as evidence for the involvement of centralized attention-driven processes (He et al 1997;Holcombe & Cavanagh 2001;Holcombe 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although temporal synchrony is considered to be a relatively minor cue for within-attribute binding of spatially separate visual signals (Leonards et al 1996;Alais et al 1998;Lee & Blake 1999;Motoyoshi & Nishida 2001), it is a critical clue for binding signals across different attributes, in particular across different modalities (Munhall et al 1996;Sekuler et al 1997;Holcombe & Cavanagh 2001;Spence 2007). A good example is an audience binding audio-visual signals through temporal synchrony even when there is a mismatch in spatial location (ventriloquist effect) (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A common perceptual temporal limit of binding synchronous inputs across different sensory attributes and modalities

Fujisaki

Nishida²

2010

Proc. R. Soc. B.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The human brain processes different aspects of the surrounding environment through multiple sensory modalities, and each modality can be subdivided into multiple attribute-specific channels. When the brain rebinds sensory content information ('what') across different channels, temporal coincidence ('when') along with spatial coincidence ('where') provides a critical clue. It however remains unknown whether neural mechanisms for binding synchronous attributes are specific to each attribute combination, or universal and central. In human psychophysical experiments, we examined how combinations of visual, auditory and tactile attributes affect the temporal frequency limit of synchrony-based binding. The results indicated that the upper limits of cross-attribute binding were lower than those of withinattribute binding, and surprisingly similar for any combination of visual, auditory and tactile attributes (2 -3 Hz). They are unlikely to be the limits for judging synchrony, since the temporal limit of a crossattribute synchrony judgement was higher and varied with the modality combination (4 -9 Hz). These findings suggest that cross-attribute temporal binding is mediated by a slow central process that combines separately processed 'what' and 'when' properties of a single event. While the synchrony performance reflects temporal bottlenecks existing in 'when' processing, the binding performance reflects the central temporal limit of integrating 'when' and 'what' properties.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A common perceptual temporal limit of binding synchronous inputs across different sensory attributes and modalities

Fujisaki

Nishida²

2010

Proc. R. Soc. B.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Holcombe and his colleagues have shown that specialized processors in our visual system allow us to perceive certain changes rapidly, on timescales of a few dozen milliseconds or less (Holcombe and Cavanagh, 2001;Clifford et al, 2004). However, when a specialized detector is not available for a visual timing judgment, the brain shows very poor temporal resolution.…”

Section: Psychophysicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Time and the Brain: How Subjective Time Relates to Neural Time

Eagleman¹,

Tse²,

Buonomano³

et al. 2005

J. Neurosci.

157

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most of the actions our brains perform on a daily basis, such as perceiving, speaking, and driving a car, require timing on the scale of tens to hundreds of milliseconds. New discoveries in psychophysics, electrophysiology, imaging, and computational modeling are contributing to an emerging picture of how the brain processes, learns, and perceives time.Key words: brain; time; behavior; perception; psychophysics; illusion; causality Brains have a difficult problem to solve. Signals from different modalities are processed at different speeds in distant neural regions, but to be useful to the organism as a whole, these signals must become aligned in time and correctly tagged to outside events (Eagleman, 2005b). Understanding the timing of events, such as a motor act followed by a sensory consequence, is critical for moving, speaking, determining causality, and decoding the barrage of temporal patterns at our sensory receptors.Despite its importance to behavior and perception, the neural bases of time perception remain shrouded in mystery. Scattered confederacies of investigators have been interested in time for decades, but only in the past few years has a concerted effort been applied to old problems. Now, experimental psychology is striving to understand how animals perceive and encode temporal intervals, whereas physiology, functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), and EEG unmask how neurons and brain regions underlie temporal computations. In this review, we sketch parts of an emerging picture and highlight remaining confusions about time in the brain. Some of the overarching questions are as follows: How do brains encode and decode information that streams in through time? How are signals entering various brain regions at varied times coordinated with one another? What is the temporal precision with which perception represents the outside world? How are intervals, durations, and sequences coded in the brain? What factors (causality, attention, adrenaline, or eye movements) influence temporal judgments and why? Does the brain constantly recalibrate its time perception? In this minisymposium, we illustrate different experimental approaches that attempt to shine light on these questions and others. PsychophysicsMuch of what we know about time in the brain comes from psychophysical experiments. One class of studies involves ways in which time perception distorts: for example, during brief, dangerous events, such as car accidents and robberies, many people report that events pass in slow motion as if time slowed down. Recent studies have been able to quantify distorted time judgments during rapid eye movements (Eagleman, 2005a;Morrone et al., 2005) or after adaptation to flickering or moving stimuli (Johnston et al., 2005;Kanai and Verstraten, 2005).Although such examples are probably related to very low-level processes, other investigators have reported time distortions they believe are related to attentional shifts (Tse et al., 2004). For example, Tse and colleagues have shown that, when many stimuli are show...

show abstract

“…Battelli et al 2003). This limited temporal resolution of attention is not a failure of low-level vision, but a constraint on our ability to modulate attention over time (Holcombe and Cavanagh 2001;Verstraten et al 2000). Thus, I also hypothesize that DS22q11.2 creates a differential, hypergranular temporal resolution of attention as well.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A new account of the neurocognitive foundations of impairments in space, time, and number processing in children with chromosome 22q11.2 deletion syndrome

Simon

2008

Dev Disabil Res Revs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper I present an updated account that attempts to explain, in cognitive processing and neural terms, the nonverbal intellectual impairments experienced by most children with deletions of chromosome 22q11.2. Specifically, I propose that this genetic syndrome leads to early developmental changes in the structure and function of clearly delineated neural circuits for basic spatiotemporal cognition. This dysfunction then cascades into impairments in basic magnitude and then numerical processes, because of the central role that representations of space and time play in their construction. I propose that this takes the form of "spatiotemporal hypergranularity"; the increase in grain size and thus reduced resolution of mental representations of spatial and temporal information. The result is that spatiotemporal processes develop atypically and thereby produce the characteristic impairments in nonverbal cognitive domains that are a hallmark feature of chromosome 22q11.2 deletion syndrome. If this hypothesis driven account is supported by future research, the results will create a neurocognitive explanation of spatiotemporal and numerical impairments in the syndrome that is specific enough to be directly translated into the development of targeted therapeutic interventions.

show abstract

Early binding of feature pairs for visual perception

Cited by 136 publications

References 8 publications

A common perceptual temporal limit of binding synchronous inputs across different sensory attributes and modalities

A common perceptual temporal limit of binding synchronous inputs across different sensory attributes and modalities

Time and the Brain: How Subjective Time Relates to Neural Time

A new account of the neurocognitive foundations of impairments in space, time, and number processing in children with chromosome 22q11.2 deletion syndrome

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About