The spatial scale of perceptual memory in ambiguous figure perception

Journal of Vision

Volumn 9, Issue 13, 2009, Pages 1-12

  Knapen, Tomas ^a,b   Brascamp, Jan ^b,c   Adams, Wendy J ^d   Graf, Erich W ^d  

^a UNIVERSITÉ PARIS DESCARTES   (France)

^b UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Eye movements; Perceptual bistability; Perceptual decision; Perceptual memory; Perceptual stabilization; Retinotopic organization

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; HUMAN; MEMORY; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY;

FORM PERCEPTION; HUMANS; MEMORY; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PHOTIC STIMULATION;

EID: 77950353040     PISSN: None     EISSN: 15347362     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1167/9.13.1     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Adams, D. L., & Horton, J. C. (2003). The representation of retinal blood vessels in primate striate cortex. Journal of Neuroscience, 23, 5984-5997.
2. Blake, R., & Logothetis, N. K. (2002). Visual competition. Nature and Review Neuroscience, 3, 13-21.
3. Born, R. T., & Bradley, D. C. (2005). Structure and function of visual area MT. Annuals Review Neuroscience, 28, 157-189.
4. Brascamp, J. W., Knapen, T. H. J., Kanai, R., Noest, A. J., van Ee, R., & van den Berg, A. V. (2008). Multitimescale perceptual history resolves visual ambiguity. PLoS ONE, 3, e1497.
5. Brascamp, J. W., Pearson, J., Blake, R., & van den Berg, A. V. (2009). Intermittent ambiguous stimuli: Implicit memory causes periodic perceptual alternations. Journal of Vision, 9(3):3, 1-23, http://journalofvision.org/9/3/3/, doi:10.1167/9.3.3.
6. Brascamp, J. W., van Ee, R., Noest, A. J., Jacobs, R. H. A. H., & van den Berg, A. V. (2007). The time course of binocular rivalry reveals a fundamental role of noise. Journal of Vision, 6(11):8, 1244-1256, http://journalofvision.org/6/11/8/, doi:10.1167/6.11.8.
7. Brouwer, G. J., & van Ee, R. (2007). Visual cortex allows prediction of perceptual states during ambiguous structure-from-motion. Journal of Neuroscience, 27, 1015-1023.
8. Burke, D., Alais, D., & Wenderoth, P. (2000). Determinants of fusion of dichoptically presented orthogonal gratings. Perception, 28, 73-88.
9. Buswell, G. T. (1935). How people look at pictures. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
10. Carter, O. L., & Cavanagh, P. (2007). Onset rivalry: Brief presentation isolates an early independent phase of perceptual competition. PLoS ONE, 2, e343.
11. Chen, X., & He, S. (2004). Local factors determine the stabilization of monocular ambiguous and binocular rivalry stimuli. Current Biology, 14, 1013-1017.
12. Chui, T. Y., Song, H., & Burns, S. A. (2008). Adaptive-optics imaging of human cone photoreceptor distribution. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, Optics and Image Science, 25, 3021-3029.
13. Hol, K., Koene, A. R., & van Ee, R. (2003). Attention-biased multi-stable surface perception in three-dimensional structure-from-motion. Journal of Vision, 3(7):3, 486-498, http://journalofvision.org/3/7/3/, doi:10.1167/3.7.3.
14. Hollins, M., & Hudnell, K. (1980). Adaptation of the binocular rivalry mechanism. Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, 19, 1117-1120.
15. Itti, L., & Koch, C. (2001). Computational modelling of visual attention. Nature and Review Neuroscience, 2, 194-203.
16. Kanai, R., & Verstraten, F. A. J. (2006). Attentional modulation of perceptual stabilization. Proceedings of Biological Science, 273, 1217-1222.
17. Lee, S.-H., Blake, R., & Heeger, D. J. (2004). Traveling waves of activity in primary visual cortex during binocular rivalry. Nature Neuroscience, 8, 22-23.
18. Leopold, D. A., & Logothetis, N. K. (1996). Activity changes in early visual cortex reflect monkeys' percepts during binocular rivalry. Nature, 379, 549-553.
19. Leopold, D. A., Wilke, M., Maier, A., & Logothetis, N. K. (2002). Stable perception of visually ambiguous patterns. Nature Neuroscience, 5, 605-609.
20. Levelt, W. J. (1967). Note on the distribution of dominance times in binocular rivalry. British Journal of Psychology, 58, 143-145.
21. Liu, L., Tyler, C. W., & Schor, C. M. (1992). Failure of rivalry at low contrast: Evidence of a suprathreshold binocular summation process. Visual Research, 32, 1471-1479.
22. Logothetis, N. K., Leopold, D. A., & Sheinberg, D. L. (1996). What is rivalling during binocular rivalry? Nature, 380, 621-624.
23. Maier, A., Wilke, M., Logothetis, N. K., & Leopold, D. A. (2003). Perception of temporally interleaved ambiguous patterns. Current Biology, 13, 1076-1085.
24. Najemnik, J., & Geisler, W. S. (2005). Optimal eye movement strategies in visual search. Nature, 434, 387-391.
25. Noest, A. J., van Ee, R., Nijs, M. M., & van Wezel, R. J. A. (2007). Percept-choice sequences driven by interrupted ambiguous stimuli: A low-level neural model. Journal of Vision, 7(8):10, 1-14, http://journalofvision.org/7/8/10/, doi:10.1167/7.8.10.
26. Orbach, J., Ehrlich, D., & Heath, H. A. (1963). Reversibility of the Necker cube. I. An examination of the concept of "satiation of orientation". Perceptual and Motor Skills, 17, 439-458.
27. Orbach, J., Zucker, E., & Olson, R. (1966). Reversibility of the Necker cube: VII. Reversal rate as a function of figure-on and figure-off durations. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 22, 615-618.
28. O'Shea, R. P., A J Sims, A. J., & Govan, D. G. (1997). The effect of spatial frequency and field size on the spread of exclusive visibility in binocular rivalry. Visual Research, 37, 175-183.
29. Parker, A. J., & Krug, K. (2003). Neuronal mechanisms for the perception of ambiguous stimuli. Current Opinion Neurobiology, 13, 433-439.
30. Pearson, J., & Brascamp, J. (2008). Sensory memory for ambiguous vision. Trends Cognitive Science, 12, 334-341.
31. Pearson, J., & Clifford, C. W. G. (2004). Determinants of visual awareness following interruptions during rivalry. Journal of Vision, 4(3):6, 196-202, http://journalofvision.org/4/3/6/, doi:10.1167/4.3.6.
32. Polonsky, A., Blake, R., Braun, J., & Heeger, D. J. (2000). Neuronal activity in human primary visual cortex correlates with perception during binocular rivalry. Nature Neuroscience, 3, 1153-1159.
33. Ringach, D. L. (2007). On the origin of the functional architecture of the cortex. PLoS ONE, 2, e251.
34. Roorda, A., & Williams, D. R. (1999). The arrangement of the three cone classes in the living human eye. Nature, 397, 520-522.
35. Ross, J., & Ma-Wyatt, A. (2004). Saccades actively maintain perceptual continuity. Nature Neuroscience, 7, 65-69.
36. Sterzer, P., & Rees, G. (2008). A neural basis for percept stabilization in binocular rivalry. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20, 389-399.
37. Tong, F., & Engel, S. A. (2001). Interocular rivalry revealed in the human cortical blind-spot representation. Nature, 411, 195-199.
38. Tong, F., Meng, M., & Blake, R. (2006). Neural bases of binocular rivalry. Trends Cognitive Science, 10, 502-511.
39. van Beers, R. J. (2007). The sources of variability in saccadic eye movements. Journal of Neuroscience, 27, 8757-8770.
40. Wilson, H. R., Blake, R., & Lee, S.-H. (2001). Dynamics of travelling waves in visual perception. Nature, 412, 907-910.
41. Wolfe, J. M. (1983). Influence of spatial frequency, luminance, and duration on binocular rivalry and abnormal fusion of briefly presented dichoptic stimuli. Perception, 12, 447-456.
42. Yang, Y., Rose, D., & Blake, R. (1992). On the variety of percepts associated with dichoptic viewing of dissimilar monocular stimuli. Perception, 21, 47-62.
43. Yarbus, A. (1961). Eye movements during the examination of complicated objects. Biofizika, 6, 52-56.