Human Cortical Areas Underlying the Perception of Optic Flow: Brain Imaging Studies

Greenlee, Mark W.

doi:10.1016/s0074-7742(08)60746-1

Cited by 96 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 68 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…1 and Materials and Methods). The spatial distribution of regional activations found here largely conforms with previous neuroimaging studies mapping the responses to visualmotion Zeki et al, 1993;Dupont et al, 1994;de Jong et al, 1994;Tootell et al, 1995Tootell et al, , 1997Cheng et al, 1995;McCarthy et al, 1995;McKeefry et al, 1997Greenlee, 2000;Previc et al, 2000). Since the response to the stimulus per se was not the effect of interest in this study we present only an overview of the cortical response topography (Fig.…”

Section: Regions Responsive To the Visual-motion Stimulussupporting

confidence: 87%

“…In these studies (de Jong et al, 1994;Brandt et al, 1998;Cheng et al, 1995;McKeefry et al, 1997;Greenlee, 2000;Previc et al, 2000), flow responses were compared to responses to visual stimuli that cannot originate from self-motion, thus identifying candidate areas for the perception of selfmotion by virtue of their sensory response properties. Here, we correlated brain activity changes with the percept of self-motion while controlling for the underlying visual-motion stimulus.…”

Section: Vection As a Tool To Address Neural Correlates Of Self-motiomentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Neural Correlates of Visual-Motion Perception as Object- or Self-motion

et al. 2002

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Both self-motion and objects moving in our visual field generate visual motion by displacing images on the retina. Resolving this ambiguity may seem effortless but large-field visual-motion stimuli can yield perceptual rivalry between the real percept of objectmotion and the illusory percept of self-motion (vection). We used functional magnetic resonance imaging to record brain activity in human observers exposed to constant-velocity roll-motion. This stimulus induced responses in areas reaching from calcarine to parieto-occipital and to ventral and lateral temporo-occipital cortex and the anterior insula. During vection, early motion-sensitive visual areas and vestibular parieto-insular cortex deactivated, whereas higher-order parieto-and temporo-occipital areas known to respond to optical flow retained identical activity levels. Within this sustained response, these latter areas displayed transient activations in response to each perceptual switch as identified in event-related analyses. Our results thus show that these areas are responsive to the type of visual motion stimulus and highly sensitive to its perceptual bistability. The only region to be more active during perceived self-motion was in, or close to, the cerebellar nodulus. This activation may correspond to the gain increase of torsional optokinetic nystagmus during vection and/or to changes in sensory processing related to the rotational percept. In conclusion, we identified neural correlates of perceiving self-motion from vision alone, i.e., in the absence of confirmatory vestibular or proprioceptive input. These functional properties preserve the organism's ability to move accurately in its environment by relying on visual cues under conditions when the other spatial senses fail to provide such information. © 2002 Elsevier Science (USA)

show abstract

Section: Regions Responsive To the Visual-motion Stimulussupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Vection As a Tool To Address Neural Correlates Of Self-motiomentioning

confidence: 99%

Neural Correlates of Visual-Motion Perception as Object- or Self-motion

et al. 2002

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Human functional imaging studies that have used optic flow stimuli have not reported significant activation in frontal eye field Wunderlich et al, 2002;Greenlee, 2000;Morrone et al, 2000;Dukelow et al, 2001;Peuskens et al, 2001!. This might be due to low signal strength combined with high statistical thresholds for identifying significant blood oxygen level dependent signal~BOLD!…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radial motion bias in macaque frontal eye field

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The visual responsiveness and spatial tuning of frontal eye field~FEF! neurons were determined using a delayed memory saccade task. Neurons with visual responses were then tested for direction selectivity using moving random dot patterns centered in the visual receptive field. The preferred axis of motion showed a significant tendency to be aligned with the receptive-field location so as to favor motion toward or away from the center of gaze. Centrifugal outward! motion was preferred over centripetal motion. Motion-sensitive neurons in FEF thus appear to have a direction bias at the population level. This bias may facilitate the detection or discrimination of expanding optic flow patterns. The direction bias is similar to that seen in visual area MT and in posterior parietal cortex, from which FEF receives afferent projections. The outward motion bias may explain asymmetries in saccades made to moving targets. A representation of optic flow in FEF might be useful for planning eye movements during navigation.

show abstract

“…the relative motion between dots) is the only depth cue (Rogers and Graham, 1979;Braunstein and Andersen, 1984;Cornilleau-Pérès and Droulez, 1994). The neural substrate of SFM perception has been explored in various imaging studies (Orban et al, 1999;Paradis et al, 2000; see also the review by Greenlee et al, 2000;Kriegeskorte et al, 2003;Murray et al, 2003;. Overall, optical flows generating SFM perception activate a large set of visual areas, not specific to the extraction of the structure information from motion: this SFM network includes the visual motion areas (including V2, V5+ and regions of the intraparietal sulcus); ventral areas involved in shape perception (lateral occipital and fusiform cortices; collateral sulcus) and areas presumably involved in the control of attention (in the intraparietal and precentral sulci).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Processing 3D form and 3D motion: Respective contributions of attention-based and stimulus-driven activity

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To cite this version:A.-L Paradis, J Droulez, V Cornilleau-Pérès, J.-B Poline. Processing 3D form and 3D motion: Respective contributions of attention-based and stimulus-driven activity. NeuroImage, Elsevier, 2008, 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008 1 Processing 3D form and 3D motion: respective contributions of attention-based and stimulus-driven activity. Keywords: fMRI; structure from motion; selective attention; stimulus-driven processing; 3D shape; 3D motion; dorsal pathway; ventral pathway. 2 ABSTRACTThis study aims at segregating the neural substrate for the 3D-form and 3D-motion attributes in structure-from-motion perception, and at disentangling the stimulus-driven and endogenous-attention-driven processing of these attributes.Attention and stimulus were manipulated independently: participants had to detect the transitions of one attribute -form, 3D motion or colour-while the visual stimulus underwent successive transitions of all attributes. We compared the BOLD activity related to form and 3D motion in three conditions: stimulus-driven processing (unattended transitions), endogenous attentional selection (task) or both stimulus-driven processing and attentional selection (attended transitions).In all conditions, the form versus 3D-motion contrasts revealed a clear dorsal/ventral segregation. However, while the form-related activity is consistent with previously described shape-selective areas, the activity related to 3D motion does not encompass the usual "visual motion" areas, but rather corresponds to a high-level motion system, including IPL and STS areas.Second, we found a dissociation between the neural processing of unattended attributes and that involved in endogenous attentional selection. Areas selective for 3D-motion and form showed either increased activity at transitions of these respective attributes or decreased activity when subjects' attention was directed to a competing attribute. We propose that both facilitatory and suppressive mechanisms of attribute selection are involved depending on the conditions driving this selection. Therefore, attentional selection is not limited to an increased activity in areas processing stimulus properties, and may unveil different functional localization from stimulus modulation. ABBREVIATIONS 3D = three-dimensional; SFM = structure from motion; BOLD = blood oxygenation level dependent ; (f)MRI = (functional) magnetic resonance imaging; ROI = region of interest.3

show abstract

Human Cortical Areas Underlying the Perception of Optic Flow: Brain Imaging Studies

Cited by 96 publications

References 68 publications

Neural Correlates of Visual-Motion Perception as Object- or Self-motion

Neural Correlates of Visual-Motion Perception as Object- or Self-motion

Radial motion bias in macaque frontal eye field

Processing 3D form and 3D motion: Respective contributions of attention-based and stimulus-driven activity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About