Literature DB >> 15028218

Fusion and rivalry are dependent on the perceptual meaning of visual stimuli.

Timothy J Andrews1, R Beau Lotto.   

Abstract

We view the world with two eyes and yet are typically only aware of a single, coherent image. Arguably the simplest explanation for this is that the visual system unites the two monocular stimuli into a common stream that eventually leads to a single coherent sensation. However, this notion is inconsistent with the well-known phenomenon of rivalry; when physically different stimuli project to the same retinal location, the ensuing perception alternates between the two monocular views in space and time. Although fundamental for understanding the principles of binocular vision and visual awareness, the mechanisms under-lying binocular rivalry remain controversial. Specifically, there is uncertainty about what determines whether monocular images undergo fusion or rivalry. By taking advantage of the perceptual phenomenon of color contrast, we show that physically identical monocular stimuli tend to rival-not fuse-when they signify different objects at the same location in visual space. Conversely, when physically different monocular stimuli are likely to represent the same object at the same location in space, fusion is more likely to result. The data suggest that what competes for visual awareness in the two eyes is not the physical similarity between images but the similarity in their perceptual/empirical meaning.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15028218     DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2004.02.030

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Biol        ISSN: 0960-9822            Impact factor:   10.834


  10 in total

1.  The initial interactions underlying binocular rivalry require visual awareness.

Authors:  Sarah Hancock; David Whitney; Timothy J Andrews
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2008-01-07       Impact factor: 2.240

2.  Illusory colors promote interocular grouping during binocular rivalry.

Authors:  Chai-Youn Kim; Randolph Blake
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2007-04

3.  Stereopsis and binocular rivalry are based on perceived rather than physical orientations.

Authors:  Adrien Chopin; Pascal Mamassian; Randolph Blake
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2012-05-15       Impact factor: 1.886

4.  Grouping ambiguous neural representations: neither identical chromaticity (the stimulus) nor color (the percept) is necessary.

Authors:  Emily Slezak; Steven K Shevell
Journal:  J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis       Date:  2020-04-01       Impact factor: 2.129

5.  Binocular rivalry alternations and their relation to visual adaptation.

Authors:  Daphne Roumani; Konstantinos Moutoussis
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2012-03-01       Impact factor: 3.169

6.  The effects of categorical and linguistic adaptation on binocular rivalry initial dominance.

Authors:  Vassilis Pelekanos; Daphne Roumani; Konstantinos Moutoussis
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2012-01-11       Impact factor: 3.169

7.  Understanding attentional modulation of binocular rivalry: a framework based on biased competition.

Authors:  Kevin Conrad Dieter; Duje Tadin
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2011-12-02       Impact factor: 3.169

8.  A hierarchical model of perceptual multistability involving interocular grouping.

Authors:  Yunjiao Wang; Zachary P Kilpatrick; Krešimir Josić
Journal:  J Comput Neurosci       Date:  2020-04-27       Impact factor: 1.453

9.  The brightness of colour.

Authors:  David Corney; John-Dylan Haynes; Geraint Rees; R Beau Lotto
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-03-31       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Duality in binocular rivalry: distinct sensitivity of percept sequence and percept duration to imbalance between monocular stimuli.

Authors:  Chen Song; Haishan Yao
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-09-07       Impact factor: 3.240

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.