Spatiotopic updating of visual feature information

Abstract

Saccades shift the retina with high-speed motion. In order to compensate for the sudden displacement, the visuomotor system needs to combine saccade-related information and visual metrics. Many neurons in oculomotor but also in visual areas shift their receptive field shortly before the execution of a saccade (Duhamel, Colby, & Goldberg, 1992; Nakamura & Colby, 2002). These shifts supposedly enable the binding of information from before and after the saccade. It is a matter of current debate whether these shifts are merely location based (i.e., involve remapping of abstract spatial coordinates) or also comprise information about visual features. We have recently presented fMRI evidence for a feature-based remapping mechanism in visual areas V3, V4, and VO (Zimmermann, Weidner, Abdollahi, & Fink, 2016). In particular, we found fMRI adaptation in cortical regions representing a stimulus' retinotopic as well as its spatiotopic position. Here, we asked whether spatiotopic adaptation exists independently from retinotopic adaptation and which type of information is behaviorally more relevant after saccade execution. We first adapted at the saccade target location only and found a spatiotopic tilt aftereffect. Then, we simultaneously adapted both the fixation and the saccade target location but with opposite tilt orientations. As a result, adaptation from the fixation location was carried retinotopically to the saccade target position. The opposite tilt orientation at the retinotopic location altered the effects induced by spatiotopic adaptation. More precisely, it cancelled out spatiotopic adaptation at the saccade target location. We conclude that retinotopic and spatiotopic visual adaptation are independent effects.

Predictive remapping of visual features beyond saccadic targets

“…This hypothesis was further supported by several subsequent studies (Harrison et al, 2013;Hunt & Cavanagh, 2011;Jonikaitis, Szinte, Rolfs, & Cavanagh, 2013;Puntiroli, Kerzel, & Born, 2015). However, in recent years a number of studies have provided evidence that feature information, in addition to attentional pointers, is also involved in transsaccadic remapping (Cha & Chong, 2013;Demeyer, De Graef, Wagemans, & Verfaillie, 2009, 2010Demeyer, Graef, Verfaillie, & Wagemans, 2011;Eccelpoel, Germeys, Graef, & Verfaillie, 2008;Edwards, VanRullen, & Cavanagh, 2017;Fracasso, Caramazza, & Melcher, 2010;Gordon, Vollmer, & Frankl, 2008;Habtegiorgis, Rifai, Lappe, & Wahl, 2018;Harrison & Bex, 2014;Hayhoe, Lachter, & Feldman, 1991;He et al, 2017;Herwig & Schneider, 2014;Koller & Rafal, 2018;Melcher, 2007;Nakashima & Sugita, 2017;Oostwoud Wijdenes, Marshall, & Bays, 2015;Paeye, Collins, & Cavanagh, 2017;Prime, Niemeier, & Crawford, 2006;Prime, Vesia, & Crawford, 2011;Sligte et al, 2017;Wittenberg, Bremmer, & Wachtler, 2008;Wolfe & Whitney, 2015;Zimmermann et al, 2013;Zimmermann et al, 2017;Zimmermann, Weidner, Abdollahi, & Fink, 2016;Zirnsak et al, 2011). Our study is in line with these studies, and further...…”

“…Although predictive remapping has been widely studied, there is an ongoing debate regarding whether and how feature information of visual objects is remapped during this process (Cavanagh, Hunt, Afraz, & Rolfs, 2010;Ezzati, Golzar, & Afraz, 2008;Harrison, Retell, Remington, & Mattingley, 2013;He, Mo, & Fang, 2017;Lescroart, Kanwisher, & Golomb, 2016;Mayo & Sommer, 2010;Melcher, 2005Melcher, , 2007Melcher, , 2010Pelli & Cavanagh, 2013;Zimmermann, Weidner, & Fink, 2017;). On the one hand, several psychophysical studies have suggested that visual feature information, such as orientation and letter information, is transmitted around the time of a saccade (Harrison et al, 2013;He et al, 2017;Melcher, 2007).…”

The peripheral preview effect with faces: Combined EEG and eye-tracking suggests multiple stages of trans-saccadic predictive and non-predictive processing

“…One source of visual stability may be the integration of preand post-saccadic visual information (Helmholtz, 1867;Melcher, 2011;Wurtz, 2008). Recent gaze-contingent experimental designs have revealed that orientation (Ganmor et al, 2015;Wolf and Schütz, 2015;Zimmermann et al, 2017), object size (Valsecchi and Gegenfurtner, 2016), visual motion (Fabius et al, 2016), and even whole-object information (Castelhano and Pereira, 2017;Schut et al, 2016) are integrated across saccades in a statistically optimal fashion that takes into account the relative reliability of pre-saccadic and post-saccadic input (Ganmor et al, 2015;Herwig, 2015;Wolf and Schütz, 2015). Nonetheless, the time-course of trans-saccadic perception and, in particular, the content of perception immediately after fixation-onset remain controversial (for review, Melcher and Morrone, 2015).…”

Previewing a face in the periphery reduces the fN170: Combined EEG and eye-tracking suggests two stages of trans-saccadic predictive processes

“…One source of visual stability may be the integration of pre- and post-saccadic visual information (Helmholtz, 1867; Melcher, 2011; Wurtz, 2008). Recent gaze-contingent experimental designs have revealed that orientation (Ganmor et al, 2015; Wolf and Schütz, 2015; Zimmermann et al, 2017), object size (Valsecchi and Gegenfurtner, 2016), visual motion (Fabius et al, 2016), and whole-object information (Castelhano and Pereira, 2017; Schut et al, 2016) are integrated across saccades in a statistically optimal fashion taking into account the relative reliability of pre-saccadic and post-saccadic input (Ganmor et al, 2015; Herwig, 2015; Wolf and Schütz, 2015). Nonetheless, the time-course of trans-saccadic perception and, in particular, the content of perception immediately after fixation-onset remain controversial (for review, Melcher and Morrone, 2015)…”