Ultra-precise quantal timing: Evidence from simultaneity thresholds in long-range apparent movement

Abstract

Conditions for the disappearance of long-range apparent movement were investigated. In an experiment on beta motion, critical interstimulus intervals (ISIs) of downward simultaneity thresholds for stimuli presented in continuous alternation were determined for exposure durations (EDs) varying from 3 to 160 msec. Each subject performed each test twice. Data were collected in three sessions, each for one of three angular separations (30, 6 0, and 12 0) and the full set of EDs. The distribution of critical ISIs collapsed across subjects, EDs, and angular separations shows sharp maxima at regular distances within a range of 0-110 msec lSI. Significant or near-significant peaks were found at ISIs of5, 9, 22, 27, 43, 55, and 107 msec. Although mean critical ISIs shifted with spatial separation, no essential shift of the main maxima occurred. Evidence of a periodic modulation with a period duration of 4.5 msec was obtained from the distributions of differences between critical ISIs of the first tests and their replications, which exhibit extremely low standard deviations (<10 msec). These results agree well with previous analyses (Geissler, 1987(Geissler, , 1992) that led to a taxonomic model of quanta! timing, briefly summarized in this paper. Further consequences are discussed and related to earlier developments (Geissler, 1991(Geissler, , 1992(Geissler, , 1997.In this paper, we consider simultaneity thresholds of apparent movement as a tool for exploring phenomena of temporal quantization in perception on the millisecond level of real time. Before introducing the experimental setup, we present a brief outline of the theoretical rationale from which our expectations about fine-grained temporal structures in perception derive. MotivationWhether or not mental processes exhibit a discrete quantal temporal fine-structure is an old question in psychology. But to date, none of the proposed answers has proved to be satisfactory. Early theorizing on the issue was based on the notion of a psychological moment as a universal building block of mental time (Stroud, 1956;Baer, 1864). Evidence from the last four decades, however, indicates that approaches adopting universal principles for mental timing cannot safely assume one unique basic unit of time, if a theory of this type can be maintained at all (Block, 1990;McReynolds, 1953; for an over-

Temporal Cognition and the Phenomenology of Time: A Multiplicative Function for Apparent Duration

“…Apparent motion is an emergent quality, not reducible to single flashes of light. Apparent duration, theoretically derived from a train of subjective time units, is in a way similar to the emergent quality of apparent motion (Geissler, Schebera, & Kompass, 1999). Apparent motion breaks down as the interstimulus interval (ISI) increases (ISI Ͼ 200 ms), resulting in the perception of a succession of flashes and not their temporal integration (Sekuler, 1996).…”

Evidence for a 40-Hz oscillatory short-term visual memory revealed by human reaction-time measurements.

“…For example, Dehaene (1993) and Geissler, Schebera, and Kompass (1999) have argued that visuoperceptual processing is characteristically temporal, and by the latter account, may be described in terms of "time quanta" providing the structure for various types of stimulus coding operations and their temporal coupling. Furthermore, recent computational modeling studies of dynamic binding (e.g., Hummel & Holyoak, 1997;Lisman & Miart, 1995;Shastri & Ajjanagadde, 1993) have demonstrated that separate attributes of a stimulus may be maintained within different phases of a global processing rhythm.…”

Fast Cyclic Stimulus Flashing Modulates Dominance Duration in Binocular Rivalry

“…The time of the optimal moment for the stimuli reception is governed by some intrinsic rhythmic oscillation of the neuron activities. With the accuracy that can ensure our method of measurement, the frequency of this oscillator is about 111 Hz and hypothetic "perceptual quantum" equals about 4−5 ms. Due to this synchronization, the reception of the information occurs only in the discreet time moments (Geissler, 1987(Geissler, , 1990Geissler et al, 1999;Vanagas et al, 1976, Vanagas, 2001). There are findings, which may confirm the presence of intrinsic oscillators regulating the system susceptibility: the excitation wave in the retina (Torborg et al, 2005); the fast small oscillations of the eye (tremor) could be related to a selection of the visual information (Matuzevicius & Vaitkevicius, 2012); the rhythmic excitatory activities in "Barrel cortex" of the mouse and other structures (Greschner, Bongard, Rujan, & Ammermüller, 2002;VanRullen & Koch, 2003;Cardin et al, 2009;Latour, 1967), and so on;…”

“…Many research works (Geissler, 1987(Geissler, , 1990Geissler, Schebera, & Kompass, 1999;Kompass, 1999;Kristofferson, 1967Kristofferson, , 1980Treisman, 1963;Treisman, Faulkner, Naish, & Brogan, 1990;Vanagas, Balkelite, Bartusjavicus, & Kirvialis, 1976;Vanagas, 1994Vanagas, , 2001Andrew A. Fingelkurts & Alexander A. Fingelkurts, 2006) demonstrated the existence of the substantial amount of the time discretization across different tasks and sensory modalities. The rhythmic activity of the physiological processes in nervous system which could be responsible for the discreetness of perception in time (Bernander & Koch, 1994;Sompolinsky & Tsodyks, 1994;Torborg, Hansen, & Feller, 2005;Paik, Kumar, & Glaser, 2009;Kitzbichler, Smith, Christensen, & Bullmore, 2009;Cardin, Carlen, Meletis, Knoblich, Zhang, Deisseroth, Tsai, & Moore, 2009;Tabareau, Slotine, & Pham, 2010;VanRullen & Dubois, 2011;Treisman, Faulkner, Naish, & Brogan, 1990) was deeply disputed.…”

“…Hence, there is the discrete time interval when the stimulus can effectively change the responses of the neurons within the neural system. Sometimes, this time interval is called time quantum of perception (Vanagas, Balkelite, Bartusjavicus, & Kirvialis, 1976;Vanagas, 2001;Geissler, 1987;Geissler, Schebera, & Kompass, 1999;Andrew A. Fingelkurts & Alexander A. Fingelkurts, 2006). If the effectiveness of the stimulus depends upon the frequency of the flickering stimulus, then the alteration rate of the perceived images under the binocular rivalry can also depend upon the frequency of the flicker.…”