Literature DB >> 15330700

Can attention selectively bias bistable perception? Differences between binocular rivalry and ambiguous figures.

Ming Meng1, Frank Tong.   

Abstract

It is debated whether different forms of bistable perception result from common or separate neural mechanisms. Binocular rivalry involves perceptual alternations between competing monocular images, whereas ambiguous figures such as the Necker cube lead to alternations between two possible pictorial interpretations. Previous studies have shown that observers can voluntarily control the alternation rate of both rivalry and Necker cube reversal, perhaps suggesting that bistable perception results from a common mechanism of top-down selection. However, according to the biased competition model of selective attention, attention should be able to enhance the attended percept and suppress the unattended percept. Here, we investigated selective attentional modulation of dominance durations in bistable perception. Observers consistently showed much weaker selective attentional control for rivalry than for Necker cube reversal, even for rivalry displays that maximized the opportunities for feature-, object-, or space-based attentional selection. In contrast, nonselective control of alternation rate was comparably strong for both forms of bistable perception and corresponded poorly with estimates of selective attentional control. Our results support the notion that binocular rivalry involves a more automatic, stimulus-driven form of visual competition than Necker cube reversal, and as a consequence, is less easily biased by selective attention.

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15330700      PMCID: PMC1403736          DOI: 10.1167/4.7.2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vis        ISSN: 1534-7362            Impact factor:   2.240


  33 in total

Review 1.  Visual attention: insights from brain imaging.

Authors:  N Kanwisher; E Wojciulik
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 34.870

2.  Multistable phenomena: changing views in perception.

Authors: 
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 20.229

3.  Differences in top-down influences on the reversal rate of different categories of reversible figures.

Authors:  D Strüber; M Stadler
Journal:  Perception       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 1.490

4.  Dynamics of travelling waves in visual perception.

Authors:  H R Wilson; R Blake; S H Lee
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2001-08-30       Impact factor: 49.962

5.  Binocular rivalry and visual awareness in human extrastriate cortex.

Authors:  F Tong; K Nakayama; J T Vaughan; N Kanwisher
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 17.173

6.  When the brain changes its mind: interocular grouping during binocular rivalry.

Authors:  I Kovács; T V Papathomas; M Yang; A Fehér
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1996-12-24       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 7.  Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention.

Authors:  R Desimone; J Duncan
Journal:  Annu Rev Neurosci       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 12.449

8.  What is rivalling during binocular rivalry?

Authors:  N K Logothetis; D A Leopold; D L Sheinberg
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1996-04-18       Impact factor: 49.962

9.  Timing and competition in networks representing ambiguous figures.

Authors:  C Gómez; E D Argandoña; R G Solier; J C Angulo; M Vázquez
Journal:  Brain Cogn       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 2.310

10.  Multiple representations of the same reversible figure: implications for cognitive decisional interpretations.

Authors:  G M Long; T C Toppino
Journal:  Perception       Date:  1981       Impact factor: 1.490

View more
  110 in total

Review 1.  United we sense, divided we fail: context-driven perception of ambiguous visual stimuli.

Authors:  P C Klink; R J A van Wezel; R van Ee
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2012-04-05       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 2.  Multistability, cross-modal binding and the additivity of conjoined grouping principles.

Authors:  Michael Kubovy; Minhong Yu
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2012-04-05       Impact factor: 6.237

3.  Right parietal brain activity precedes perceptual alternation during binocular rivalry.

Authors:  Juliane Britz; Michael A Pitts; Christoph M Michel
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2010-08-05       Impact factor: 5.038

4.  Neuromagnetic correlates of streaming in human auditory cortex.

Authors:  Alexander Gutschalk; Christophe Micheyl; Jennifer R Melcher; André Rupp; Michael Scherg; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2005-06-01       Impact factor: 6.167

5.  Binocular rivalry transitions predict inattention symptom severity in adult ADHD.

Authors:  Aiste Jusyte; Natalia Zaretskaya; Nina Maria Höhnle; Andreas Bartels; Michael Schönenberg
Journal:  Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci       Date:  2017-04-13       Impact factor: 5.270

6.  The role of frontal and parietal brain areas in bistable perception.

Authors:  Tomas Knapen; Jan Brascamp; Joel Pearson; Raymond van Ee; Randolph Blake
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2011-07-13       Impact factor: 6.167

7.  The role of attention on the integration of visual and inertial cues.

Authors:  Daniel R Berger; Heinrich H Bülthoff
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-04-07       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Brain mechanisms for simple perception and bistable perception.

Authors:  Megan Wang; Daniel Arteaga; Biyu J He
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-08-13       Impact factor: 11.205

9.  Regulating the Access to Awareness: Brain Activity Related to Probe-related and Spontaneous Reversals in Binocular Rivalry.

Authors:  Brian A Metzger; Kyle E Mathewson; Evelina Tapia; Monica Fabiani; Gabriele Gratton; Diane M Beck
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2017-02-14       Impact factor: 3.225

10.  Effects of attention on visual experience during monocular rivalry.

Authors:  Eric A Reavis; Peter J Kohler; Gideon P Caplovitz; Thalia P Wheatley; Peter U Tse
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2013-03-13       Impact factor: 1.886

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.