Literature DB >> 26605842

Perceived temporal asynchrony between sinusoidally modulated luminance and depth.

Gojko Žaric, Arash Yazdanbakhsh, Shigeaki Nishina, Peter De Weerd, Takeo Watanabe.   

Abstract

Simultaneously presented visual events lead to temporally asynchronous percepts. This has led some researchers to conclude that the asynchronous experience is a manifestation of differences in neural processing time for different visual attributes. Others, however, have suggested that the asynchronous experience is due to differences in temporal markers for changes of different visual attributes. Here, two sets of bars were presented, one to each eye. Either the bars were moving or their luminance was gradually changing. Bars moved horizontally in counterphase at low frequencies along short trajectories and were presented stereoscopically, such that the horizontal movements were perceived as back-and-forth motion on a sagittal plane, or monocularly to a dominant eye, preserving a perception of the horizontal movements on a frontal plane. In a control condition, bars were stationary and their luminance was modulated. The changes in stimulus speed or luminance occurred sinusoidally. When asked to adjust the phase of one stimulus to the other to achieve synchronous perception, participants showed a constant phase offset at the lowest frequencies used. Given the absence of abrupt transitions and the presence of similar gradual turning points in our stimuli to control for attentional effects, it can be concluded that asynchronous percepts in multimodal stimuli may at least in part be a manifestation of difference in neural processing time of visual attributes rather than solely a difference in the temporal markers (transitions versus turning points).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26605842      PMCID: PMC5079707          DOI: 10.1167/15.15.13

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


  28 in total

1.  Representation of stereoscopic edges in monkey visual cortex.

Authors:  R von der Heydt; H Zhou; H S Friedman
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 1.886

Review 2.  Time perception: brain time or event time?

Authors:  A Johnston; S Nishida
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2001-06-05       Impact factor: 10.834

3.  Shorter latencies for motion trajectories than for flashes in population responses of cat primary visual cortex.

Authors:  Dirk Jancke; Wolfram Erlhagen; Gregor Schöner; Hubert R Dinse
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2004-02-20       Impact factor: 5.182

4.  The flash-lag effect is reduced when the flash is perceived as a sensory consequence of our action.

Authors:  Joan López-Moliner; Daniel Linares
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2006-01-06       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  Flash lag in depth.

Authors:  Laurence R Harris; Philip A Duke; Agnieszka Kopinska
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2006-02-15       Impact factor: 1.886

6.  Sensory gain control (amplification) as a mechanism of selective attention: electrophysiological and neuroimaging evidence.

Authors:  S A Hillyard; E K Vogel; S J Luck
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  1998-08-29       Impact factor: 6.237

7.  The Psychophysics Toolbox.

Authors:  D H Brainard
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  1997

8.  Visual latencies in areas V1 and V2 of the macaque monkey.

Authors:  L G Nowak; M H Munk; P Girard; J Bullier
Journal:  Vis Neurosci       Date:  1995 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.241

9.  Motion extrapolation in catching.

Authors:  R Nijhawan
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1994-07-28       Impact factor: 49.962

10.  Ocular dominance diagnosis and its influence in monovision.

Authors:  Olga Seijas; Pilar Gómez de Liaño; Rosario Gómez de Liaño; Clare J Roberts; Elena Piedrahita; Ester Diaz
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2007-05-29       Impact factor: 5.258

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.