Predictions drive neural representations of visual events ahead of incoming sensory information

Blom, Tessel; Feuerriegel, Daniel; Johnson, Philippa Anne; Bode, Stefan; Hogendoorn, Hinze

doi:10.1073/pnas.1917777117

Cited by 92 publications

(101 citation statements)

References 32 publications

(42 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous work showed that expectations could pre-activate the stimulus template (Blom, Feuerriegel, Johnson, Bode, & Hogendoorn, 2020;Kok, Mostert, & de Lange, 2017). Our Gaze dynamics of feature-based inhibtion 18 results resonated with these findings and indicated that expectations could modulate gaze positions even before the trial started (see Fig.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Gaze dynamics of feature-based distractor inhibition under the prior-knowledge and expectation

Wen

Zhang

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prior information about distractor facilitates selective attention to task-relevant items and helps the optimization of oculomotor planning. Particularly, feature-based attentional inhibition could be benefited from the pre-knowledge of critical features of the distractors. In the present study, we capitalized on gaze-position decoding to examine the dynamics of attentional deployment in a feature-based attentional task that involved two groups of dots (target/distractor dots) moving toward different directions. Specifically, this measurement revealed how pre-knowledge of the target's or distractor's direction modulated real-time feature-based attentional bias. In Experiment 1, participants were provided with target cues indicating the moving direction of target dots. The results showed that participants were biased towards the cued direction and tracked the target dots throughout the task period. In Experiment 2 and Experiment 3, participants were provided with cues that informed the moving direction of distractor dots. The results showed that participants would continuously monitor the distractor's direction when the distractor cue varied on a trial-by-trial basis (Experiment 2). However, when the to-be-ignored distractor direction remained constant (Experiment 3), participants would strategically bias their attention to the distractor's direction before the cue onset and reduce the cost of re-deployment of attention between trials. These results suggest that monitoring the distractor's feature is a prerequisite for feature-based attentional inhibition and this process is facilitated by the predictability of the distractor's feature.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Gaze dynamics of feature-based distractor inhibition under the prior-knowledge and expectation

Wen

Zhang

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other theorists have also suggested that illusory perceptual shifts in the direction of object motion are caused by an anticipatory extrapolated representation. That is, neurons corresponding to locations ahead of a moving object are activated in advance, giving rise to perception of the moving object in that location before it reaches that location (Blom et al, 2020).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…But this does not occur (Kerzel, 2000;Kerzel, Jordan, & Müsseler, 2001;Whitney & Cavanagh, 2002;Whitney, Murakami, & Cavanagh, 2000). To explain this, advocates of the anticipatory extrapolation theory have suggested that the abrupt disappearance and associated luminance transient results in a correction or reset of extrapolation (Blom, Feuerriegel, Johnson, Bode, & Hogendoorn, 2020;Hogendoorn, 2020;Nijhawan, 2002Nijhawan, , 2008. We will refer to this as the transient correction hypothesis.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Hallucination of moving objects revealed by a dynamic noise background

Nakayama

Holcombe

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We show that on a dynamic noise background, the perceived disappearance location of a moving object is shifted in the direction of motion. This “twinkle goes” illusion has little dependence on the luminance- or chromaticity-based confusability of the object with the background, or on the amount of background motion energy in the same direction as the object motion. This suggests that the illusion is enabled by the dynamic noise masking the offset transients that otherwise accompany an object’s disappearance. While these results are consistent with an anticipatory process that pre-activates positions ahead of the object’s current position, additional findings suggest an alternative account: a continuation of attentional tracking after the object disappears. First, the shift was greatly reduced when attention was divided between two moving objects. Second, the illusion was associated with a prolonging of the perceived duration of the object, by an amount that matched the extent of extrapolation inferred from the effect of speed on the size of the illusion (~50 ms). While the anticipatory extrapolation theory does not predict this, the continuation of attentional tracking theory does. Specifically, we propose that in the absence of offset transients, attentional tracking keeps moving for several tens of milliseconds after the target disappearance, and this causes one to hallucinate a moving object at the position of attention.

show abstract

“…These studies showed that the visual system requires a certain amount of time to process incoming sensory information (Blom et al, 2020;Maunsell and Gibson, 1992). When considering the perception of moving objects, this amount of time could cause potential problems for the neurocognitive system as it rapidly needs to extrapolate the object trajectory to then rapidly plan action.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporal uncertainty enhances suppression of neural responses to predictable visual stimuli

Nara

Lizarazu

Richter

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Predictive processing has been proposed as a fundamental cognitive mechanism to account for how the brain interacts with the external environment via its sensory modalities. The brain processes external information about the content (i.e. “what”) and timing (i.e., “when”) of environmental stimuli to update an internal generative model of the world around it. However, the interaction between “what” and “when” has received very little attention when focusing on vision. In this magnetoencephalography (MEG) study we investigate how processing of feature specific information (i.e. “what”) is affected by temporal predictability (i.e. “when”). In line with previous findings, we observed a suppression of evoked neural responses in the visual cortex for predictable stimuli. Interestingly, we observed that temporal uncertainty enhances this expectation suppression effect. This suggests that in temporally uncertain scenarios the neurocognitive system relies more on internal representations and invests less resources integrating bottom-up information. Indeed, temporal decoding analysis indicated that visual features are encoded for a shorter time period by the neural system when temporal uncertainty is higher. This supports the fact that visual information is maintained active for less time for a stimulus whose time onset is unpredictable compared to when it is predictable. These findings highlight the higher reliance of the visual system on the internal expectations when the temporal dynamics of the external environment are less predictable.

show abstract

Predictions drive neural representations of visual events ahead of incoming sensory information

Cited by 92 publications

References 32 publications

Gaze dynamics of feature-based distractor inhibition under the prior-knowledge and expectation

Gaze dynamics of feature-based distractor inhibition under the prior-knowledge and expectation

Hallucination of moving objects revealed by a dynamic noise background

Temporal uncertainty enhances suppression of neural responses to predictable visual stimuli

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About