Literature DB >> 21048133

Efficient visual recalibration from either visual or haptic feedback: the importance of being wrong.

Wendy J Adams1, Iona S Kerrigan, Erich W Graf.   

Abstract

The human visual system adapts to the changing statistics of its environment. For example, the light-from-above prior, an assumption that aids the interpretation of ambiguous shading information, can be modified by haptic (touch) feedback. Here we investigate the mechanisms that drive this adaptive learning. In particular, we ask whether visual information can be as effective as haptics in driving visual recalibration and whether increased information (feedback from multiple modalities) induces faster learning. During several hours' training, feedback encouraged observers to modify their existing light-from-above assumption. Feedback was one of the following: (1) haptic only, (2) haptic and stereoscopic (providing binocular shape information), or (3) stereoscopic only. Haptic-only feedback resulted in substantial learning; the perceived shape of shaded objects was modified in accordance with observers' new light priors. However, the addition of continuous visual feedback (condition 2) substantially reduced learning. When visual-only feedback was provided intermittently (condition 3), mimicking the time course of the haptic feedback of conditions 1 and 2, substantial learning returned. The intermittent nature of conflict information, or feedback, appears critical for learning. It causes an initial, erroneous percept to be corrected. Contrary to previous proposals, we found no particular advantage for cross-modal feedback. Instead, we suggest that an "oops" factor drives efficient learning; recalibration is prioritized when a mismatch exists between sequential representations of an object property. This "oops" factor appears important both across and within sensory modalities, suggesting a general principle for perceptual learning and recalibration.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21048133      PMCID: PMC6633618          DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2749-10.2010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosci        ISSN: 0270-6474            Impact factor:   6.167


  13 in total

1.  Supervised calibration relies on the multisensory percept.

Authors:  Adam Zaidel; Wei Ji Ma; Dora E Angelaki
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2013-11-27       Impact factor: 17.173

Review 2.  Forms of prediction in the nervous system.

Authors:  Christoph Teufel; Paul C Fletcher
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2020-03-10       Impact factor: 34.870

3.  Direct and indirect haptic calibration of visual size judgments.

Authors:  Monica Gori; Alessandra Sciutti; David Burr; Giulio Sandini
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-10-13       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Learning What to See in a Changing World.

Authors:  Katharina Schmack; Veith Weilnhammer; Jakob Heinzle; Klaas E Stephan; Philipp Sterzer
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2016-05-31       Impact factor: 3.169

5.  The Southampton-York Natural Scenes (SYNS) dataset: Statistics of surface attitude.

Authors:  Wendy J Adams; James H Elder; Erich W Graf; Julian Leyland; Arthur J Lugtigheid; Alexander Muryy
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-10-26       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Touch influences perceived gloss.

Authors:  Wendy J Adams; Iona S Kerrigan; Erich W Graf
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-02-26       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  The light-from-above prior is intact in autistic children.

Authors:  Abigail Croydon; Themelis Karaminis; Louise Neil; David Burr; Elizabeth Pellicano
Journal:  J Exp Child Psychol       Date:  2017-05-15

8.  A simple and efficient method to enhance audiovisual binding tendencies.

Authors:  Brian Odegaard; David R Wozny; Ladan Shams
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2017-04-25       Impact factor: 2.984

Review 9.  Learning what to expect (in visual perception).

Authors:  Peggy Seriès; Aaron R Seitz
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2013-10-24       Impact factor: 3.169

10.  Effects of specular highlights on perceived surface convexity.

Authors:  Wendy J Adams; James H Elder
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2014-05-08       Impact factor: 4.475

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.