scholarly journals Stimulus strength and dominance duration in perceptual bi-stability. Part II: from binocular rivalry to ambiguous motion displays

2010 ◽  
Vol 2 (7) ◽  
pp. 464-464 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.-M. Hupe ◽  
N. Rubin
Keyword(s):  
Binocular Rivalry ◽  
Stimulus Strength ◽  
Dominance Duration

Does the Gamma Distribution Refer to an Underlying Mechanism in Binocular Rivalry?

Perception ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 26 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 22-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
P H C Vallen ◽  
P R Snoeren ◽  
Ch M M de Weert
Keyword(s):  
Distribution Function ◽  
Gamma Distribution ◽  
Binocular Rivalry ◽  
Waiting Times ◽  
Underlying Mechanism ◽  
Stimulus Strength ◽  
Time Intervals ◽  
Neural Spikes ◽  
Random Events ◽  
Process Speed

Thirty years ago, Levelt (1967 British Journal of Psychology58 143 – 145) fitted the distribution of dominance times in binocular rivalry with the gamma distribution (the distribution function of waiting times for N random events with process speed lambda). Ever since, the gamma distribution has been used to describe the rivalry phase durations, without an explanatory underlying mechanism being given. Although Levelt suggested lambda to be proportional to the stimulus strength (eg contrast, luminance, blur, amount of contour) and N to be ‘successive neural spikes’, this suggestion has never been tested. The purpose of this study was to test whether or not N and lambda represent characteristics of the observer and the stimulus, respectively. To collect the data as accurately as possible, we performed a large number of measurements involving different designs and stimuli. In contrast to previous experiments, collected data were not pooled but were compared within each subject. We tested the hypothesis by collecting time intervals from subjects responding to numerous conditions in which disk - ring stimuli were varied in contrast, blur, or amount of contour in one eye.

Binocular Rivalry with Rotary and Radial Motions

Perception ◽  
1986 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 435-442 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas J Wade ◽  
Charles M M De Weert
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Frequency ◽  
Binocular Rivalry ◽  
Linear Velocity ◽  
Stimulus Strength ◽  
Radial Pattern ◽  
Circular Pattern ◽  
The Third ◽  
Angular Velocities ◽  
Outward Motion ◽  
The Mean

Binocular rivalry between a radially sectored and a concentrically circular pattern was investigated in three experiments. Motion of the circular pattern was either cyclical expansion and contraction with corresponding changes in spatial frequency (experiment 1), or outward motion with a constant linear velocity (experiment 2). When both patterns were static the circular pattern was visible for longer than the radial one. Motion of either pattern alone resulted in an increase in the predominance duration and the mean period for which the pattern was visible. This is at variance with Levelt's model of rivalry. In the third experiment, rivalry was between a static circular pattern and a radial pattern that could be rotated at different angular velocities. Again it was found that an increase in stimulus strength, as measured by predominance, led to an increase in the mean periods of visibility of the rotating pattern.

Multistage Model for Binocular Rivalry

2005 ◽  
Vol 94 (6) ◽  
pp. 4412-4420 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan W. Freeman
Keyword(s):  
Binocular Rivalry ◽  
Visual Processing ◽  
Nonlinear Differential Equations ◽  
Neural Processing ◽  
Mutual Inhibition ◽  
Multistage Model ◽  
Cortical Areas ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The Right ◽  
Dominance Duration

Binocular rivalry is the alternating perception that occurs when incompatible stimuli are presented to the two eyes: one monocular stimulus dominates vision and then the other stimulus dominates, with a perceptual switch occurring every few seconds. There is a need for a binocular rivalry model that accounts for both well-established results on the timing of dominance intervals and for more recent evidence on the distributed neural processing of rivalry. The model for binocular rivalry developed here consists of four parallel visual channels, two driven by the left eye and two by the right. Each channel consists of several consecutive processing stages representing successively higher cortical levels, with mutual inhibition between the channels at each stage. All stages are architecturally identical. With n the number of stages, the model is implemented as 4 n nonlinear differential equations using a total of eight parameters. Despite the simplicity of its architecture, the model accounts for a variety of experimental observations: 1) the increasing depth of rivalry at higher cortical areas, as shown in electrophysiological, imaging, and psychophysical experiments; 2) the unimodal probability density of dominance durations, where the mode is less than the mean; 3) the lack of correlation between successive dominance durations; 4) the effect of interocular stimulus differences on dominance duration; and 5) eye suppression, as opposed to feature suppression. The model is potentially applicable to issues of visual processing more general than binocular rivalry.

scholarly journals Attention model of binocular rivalry

2017 ◽  
Vol 114 (30) ◽  
pp. E6192-E6201 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hsin-Hung Li ◽  
James Rankin ◽  
John Rinzel ◽  
Marisa Carrasco ◽  
David J. Heeger
Keyword(s):  
Binocular Rivalry ◽  
Perceptual Experience ◽  
Mutual Inhibition ◽  
Attention Model ◽  
Proposed Model ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The Brain ◽  
Input Strength ◽  
Dominance Duration

When the corresponding retinal locations in the two eyes are presented with incompatible images, a stable percept gives way to perceptual alternations in which the two images compete for perceptual dominance. As perceptual experience evolves dynamically under constant external inputs, binocular rivalry has been used for studying intrinsic cortical computations and for understanding how the brain regulates competing inputs. Converging behavioral and EEG results have shown that binocular rivalry and attention are intertwined: binocular rivalry ceases when attention is diverted away from the rivalry stimuli. In addition, the competing image in one eye suppresses the target in the other eye through a pattern of gain changes similar to those induced by attention. These results require a revision of the current computational theories of binocular rivalry, in which the role of attention is ignored. Here, we provide a computational model of binocular rivalry. In the model, competition between two images in rivalry is driven by both attentional modulation and mutual inhibition, which have distinct selectivity (feature vs. eye of origin) and dynamics (relatively slow vs. relatively fast). The proposed model explains a wide range of phenomena reported in rivalry, including the three hallmarks: (i) binocular rivalry requires attention; (ii) various perceptual states emerge when the two images are swapped between the eyes multiple times per second; (iii) the dominance duration as a function of input strength follows Levelt’s propositions. With a bifurcation analysis, we identified the parameter space in which the model’s behavior was consistent with experimental results.

scholarly journals Extending Levelt’s Propositions to perceptual multistability involving interocular grouping

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alain Jacot-Guillarmod ◽  
Yunjiao Wang ◽  
Claudia Pedroza ◽  
Haluk Ogmen ◽  
Zachary Kilpatrick ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hierarchical Model ◽  
Color Image ◽  
Stimulus Strength ◽  
Low Level ◽  
Color Saturation ◽  
Modeling Studies ◽  
Visual Hemifield ◽  
Neural Populations ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Dominance Duration

AbstractLevelt’s Propositions have been a touchstone for experimental and modeling studies of perceptual multistability. We asked whether Levelt’s Propositions extend to perceptual multistability involving interocular grouping. To address this question we used split-grating stimuli withcomplementary halves of the same color. As in previous studies, subjects reported four percepts in alternation: the two stimuli presented to each eye (single-eye percepts), as well as two interocularly grouped, single color percepts (grouped percepts). Most subjects responded to increased color saturation by more frequently reporting a single color image, thus increasingthe predominance of grouped percepts (Levelt’s Proposition I). In these subjects increased predominance was due to a decrease in the average dominance duration of single-eye percepts, while that of grouped percepts remained largely unaffected. This is in accordance with generalized Levelt’s Proposition II which posits that the average dominance duration of the stronger (in this case single-eye) percept is primarily affectedbychanges in stimulus strength. In accordance with Proposition III, thealternation rate increased as the difference in the strength of the percepts decreased. To explain the mechanism behind these observations, we introduce a hierarchical model consisting of low-level neural populations, eachresponding to input at a visual hemifield, and higher-level populations representing the percepts. The model exhibits the changes in dominance durationobserved in the data, and conforms to all of Levelt’s Propositions.

scholarly journals Motion Triggers Indefinite Stoppage Against Binocular Rivalry

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmad Yousef
Keyword(s):  
Visual Stimulus ◽  
Binocular Rivalry ◽  
High Speed ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Visual Awareness ◽  
Motion Stimulus ◽  
Moving Stimulus ◽  
Dominance Duration ◽  
High Information ◽  
As If

This article provides evidence that high-speed high-information visual stimulus is able to indefinitely dominate the visual awareness; at speed of 21 degrees/second. Greater speeds emphasize greater dominance duration for the motion stimulus, however, at 21 degrees/second the moving stimulus dominates the visual awareness exclusively and indefinitely. Astonishingly, no room for mixed precepts had been reported by the human subjects at that speed, as if, it’s the ultimate domination.

scholarly journals Deep Breathing Governs Binocular Rivalry

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmad Yousef
Keyword(s):  
Motion Perception ◽  
Binocular Rivalry ◽  
Visual Motion ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
The Other ◽  
Deep Breathing ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Visual Motion Perception ◽  
Highly Correlated ◽  
Dominance Duration

Scientists had shown that visual rivalries, whether it’s monocular or binocular have highly correlated temporal patterns of oscillations, see reference 1. Inhalation and exhalation, however, can be cognitively controlled, and these neurophysiological top-down processes can perfectly and timely alter the bistable visual motion perception, see reference 2. In this study, therefore, we decide to investigate whether deep breathing can also control the binocular rivalry. Astoundingly, we found that deep breathing is the best governor of binocular rivalry, it has the ability to significantly elongate the dominance duration. Moreover, the human subjects have sufficient control over their visually aware; namely, they usually see a stimulus during deep inhalation & the other stimulus during deep exhalation.

scholarly journals Voluntary Movements Regulate Binocular Rivalry

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmad Yousef
Keyword(s):  
Binocular Rivalry ◽  
Temporal Patterns ◽  
Voluntary Movements ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Audiovisual Perception ◽  
Highly Correlated ◽  
Dominance Duration

Scientists had shown that visual rivalries, whether it’s monocular or binocular have highly correlated temporal patterns of oscillations, see reference 1. Voluntary movements of the hand, might be scientifically consider as neurophysiological top-down processes can perfectly and timely alter the bistable audiovisual perception, see reference 2. In this study, therefore, we decide to investigate whether the voluntary movements of the limbs, namely, drawing by hands, can elongate the dominance duration of the dominate view. Astoundingly, we found that as long as the hand moves in the direction that’s correlated with the dominant view, its dominance duration can be significantly elongated.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document