Trans-saccadic adaptation of perceived size independent of saccadic adaptation

Bosco, Annalisa; Rifai, Katharina; Wahl, Siegfried; Fattori, Patrizia; Lappe, Markus

doi:10.1167/jov.20.7.19

Cited by 7 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This absence of significant variation of size perception may suggest that perceptual size responses, after a grasping movement, are not affected equally in both directions of horizontal perturbation. Bosco et al (2020) reported similar findings [ 46 ]. While in our study the horizontal bar size was modified during the origin of the grasping movement, in their experiment, size perturbation was based on the onset of the saccadic eye movements [ 46 ].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 55%

“…Nevertheless, we found a modification of saccade amplitude following horizontal size perturbation during grasping movement execution. As observed in size perceptual responses, the reported impact was not strictly bidirectional, suggesting different mechanisms in the oculomotor system for different size perturbation conditions [ 46 , 51 , 52 ]. Several studies have investigated the plasticity of the saccadic system; observing how changes in object size during saccadic execution generate changes in amplitude, consistent with the direction in size change [ 33 , 38 , 46 , 53 , 54 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…While in our study the horizontal bar size was modified during the origin of the grasping movement, in their experiment, size perturbation was based on the onset of the saccadic eye movements [ 46 ]. Different effects between shortening and lengthening conditions were reported and, as in our study, perceptual responses were not equally affected in both directions [ 46 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Horizontal target size perturbations during grasping movements are described by subsequent size perception and saccade amplitude

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Perception and action are essential in our day-to-day interactions with the environment. Despite the dual-stream theory of action and perception, it is now accepted that action and perception processes interact with each other. However, little is known about the impact of unpredicted changes of target size during grasping actions on perception. We assessed whether size perception and saccade amplitude were affected before and after grasping a target that changed its horizontal size during the action execution under the presence or absence of tactile feedback. We have tested twenty-one participants in 4 blocks of 30 trials. Blocks were divided into two experimental tactile feedback paradigms: tactile and non-tactile. Trials consisted of 3 sequential phases: pre-grasping size perception, grasping, and post-grasping size perception. During pre- and post-phases, participants executed a saccade towards a horizontal bar and performed a manual size estimation of the bar size. During grasping phase, participants were asked to execute a saccade towards the bar and to make a grasping action towards the screen. While grasping, 3 horizontal size perturbation conditions were applied: non-perturbation, shortening, and lengthening. 30% of the trials presented perturbation, meaning a symmetrically shortened or lengthened by 33% of the original size. Participants’ hand and eye positions were assessed by a motion capture system and a mobile eye-tracker, respectively. After grasping, in both tactile and non-tactile feedback paradigms, size estimation was significantly reduced in lengthening (p = 0.002) and non-perturbation (p<0.001), whereas shortening did not induce significant adjustments (p = 0.86). After grasping, saccade amplitude became significantly longer in shortening (p<0.001) and significantly shorter in lengthening (p<0.001). Non-perturbation condition did not display adjustments (p = 0.95). Tactile feedback did not generate changes in the collected perceptual responses, but horizontal size perturbations did so, suggesting that all relevant target information used in the movement can be extracted from the post-action target perception.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 55%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Horizontal target size perturbations during grasping movements are described by subsequent size perception and saccade amplitude

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Saccade adaptation has been shown to alter the geometric properties of the perceptual visual field, which in turn can modify the perceived shape of objects ( Garaas & Pomplun, 2011 ), and there is very recent evidence that saccade adaptation per se can modify the perceived size of peripheral stimuli ( Pressigout, Paeye, & Doré-Mazars, 2020 ). 4 Moreover, when saccade adaptation and perceptual re-calibration are established within the same paradigm, their strength tends to correlate across observers ( Bosco et al, 2015 ), although transsaccadic re-calibration of perceived size can be established in the absence of saccade adaptation if the expansion or contraction of the target stimulus is orthogonal to the saccade vector ( Bosco, Rifai, Wahl, Fattori, & Lappe, 2020 ). Specifically, Valsecchi and colleagues (2020 ) investigated the temporal and spatial properties of transsaccadic size re-calibration.…”

Section: Re-calibration Of Peripheral and Foveal Visionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of interactions between peripheral and foveal vision

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Visual processing varies dramatically across the visual field. These differences start in the retina and continue all the way to the visual cortex. Despite these differences in processing, the perceptual experience of humans is remarkably stable and continuous across the visual field. Research in the last decade has shown that processing in peripheral and foveal vision is not independent, but is more directly connected than previously thought. We address three core questions on how peripheral and foveal vision interact, and review recent findings on potentially related phenomena that could provide answers to these questions. First, how is the processing of peripheral and foveal signals related during fixation? Peripheral signals seem to be processed in foveal retinotopic areas to facilitate peripheral object recognition, and foveal information seems to be extrapolated toward the periphery to generate a homogeneous representation of the environment. Second, how are peripheral and foveal signals re-calibrated? Transsaccadic changes in object features lead to a reduction in the discrepancy between peripheral and foveal appearance. Third, how is peripheral and foveal information stitched together across saccades? Peripheral and foveal signals are integrated across saccadic eye movements to average percepts and to reduce uncertainty. Together, these findings illustrate that peripheral and foveal processing are closely connected, mastering the compromise between a large peripheral visual field and high resolution at the fovea. Brief overview of differences between peripheral and foveal vision Although the human eye is often compared to a photographic camera, processing across the visual field is not homogeneous like in a camera film or a digital sensor. First, there are gaps in sensory information due to several anatomical properties of the eye: (a) there are no photoreceptors in the optic disc, where the axons of the retinal ganglion cells exit the eyeball: this leads to a blind spot (Mariotte, 1740, cited after Ferree & Rand, 1912; Grzybowski & Aydin, 2007). (b) The center of the retina contains only cone, but no rod photoreceptors (Schultze, 1866; Oesterberg, 1935; Curcio, Sloan, Kalina, & Hendrickson, 1990), leading to a central scotoma under dark illumination conditions. (c) Because photoreceptors are located on the back side of the retina, away from the light, blood vessels cast shadows on them (Purkinje, 1819; von Helmholtz, 1867; Evans, 1927; Adams & Horton, 2002). The second striking difference to a photographic camera is that the processing of visual signals varies quite dramatically across the visual field. Here, an important distinction arises between the center of the visual field, called the fovea, and the rest, called the periphery. 1 We only briefly highlight some of the key differences in processing and perception between the fovea and the periphery because these have been reviewed in detail elsewhere

show abstract

“…Peripheral vision and foveal vision differ in many ways, so in order for a prediction to be useful (depending on the feature involved) the brain must take into account the relative reliability of the two sources of information (preview and post-saccadic foveal view) in order to optimally use the preview information (Ganmor, Landy, & Simoncelli, 2015;Stewart & Schütz, 2018;Wolf & Schütz, 2015). On the other hand, saccadic contingencies, in the sense of predictable changes in a stimulus across the saccade, even lead to a re-calibration of the perceptual appearance of the extrafoveal preview (Bompas & O'Regan, 2006;Bosco, Lappe, & Fattori, 2015;Bosco, Rifai, Wahl, Fattori, & Lappe, 2020;Herwig & Schneider, 2014;Paeye, Collins, Cavanagh, & Herwig, 2018;Valsecchi, Cassanello, Herwig, Rolfs, & Gegenfurtner, 2020;Valsecchi & Gegenfurtner, 2016; for a review see Stewart et al, 2020) which suggests that "what" predictions across a saccade can be relatively specific. Whether the preview effect can also be related to predicting the "when" and "where" of post-saccadic stimulation is yet to be explored.…”

Section: An Active-vision Interpretation Of Preview Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The extrafoveal preview paradigm as a measure of predictive, active sampling in visual perception

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A key feature of visual processing in humans is the use of saccadic eye movements to look around the environment. Saccades are typically used to bring relevant information, which is glimpsed with extrafoveal vision, into the high-resolution fovea for further processing. With the exception of some unusual circumstances, such as the first fixation when walking into a room, our saccades are mainly guided based on this extrafoveal preview. In contrast, the majority of experimental studies in vision science have investigated "passive" behavioral and neural responses to suddenly appearing and often temporally or spatially unpredictable stimuli. As reviewed here, a growing number of studies have investigated visual processing of objects under more natural viewing conditions in which observers move their eyes to a stationary stimulus, visible previously in extrafoveal vision, during each trial. These studies demonstrate that the extrafoveal preview has a profound influence on visual processing of objects, both for behavior and neural activity. Starting from the preview effect in reading research we follow subsequent developments in vision research more generally and finally argue that taking such evidence seriously leads to a reconceptualization of the nature of human visual perception that incorporates the strong influence of prediction and action on sensory processing. We review theoretical perspectives on visual perception under naturalistic viewing conditions, including theories of active vision, active sensing, and sampling. Although the extrafoveal preview paradigm has already provided useful information about the timing of, and potential mechanisms for, the close interaction of the oculomotor and visual systems while reading and in natural scenes, the findings thus far also raise many new questions for future research.

show abstract

Trans-saccadic adaptation of perceived size independent of saccadic adaptation

Cited by 7 publications

References 36 publications

Horizontal target size perturbations during grasping movements are described by subsequent size perception and saccade amplitude

Horizontal target size perturbations during grasping movements are described by subsequent size perception and saccade amplitude

A review of interactions between peripheral and foveal vision

The extrafoveal preview paradigm as a measure of predictive, active sampling in visual perception

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About