Reweighting visual cues by touch

Journal of Vision

Volumn 11, Issue 10, 2011, Pages 1-16

  van Beers, Robert J ^a   van Mierlo, Christa M ^a,b   Smeets, Jeroen B J ^a   Brenner, Eli ^a  

^a VU UNIVERSITY AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b OPEN UNIVERSITY OF THE NETHERLANDS   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Computational modeling; Learning; Spatial vision

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; BINOCULAR VISION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DEPTH PERCEPTION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHYSIOLOGY; TOUCH; YOUNG ADULT;

ADULT; CUES; DEPTH PERCEPTION; FEMALE; FORM PERCEPTION; HUMANS; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; TOUCH; VISION, BINOCULAR; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 80054688222     PISSN: None     EISSN: 15347362     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1167/11.10.1     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Atkins, J. E., Fiser, J., & Jacobs, R. A. (2001). Experience-dependent visual cue integration based on consistencies between visual and haptic percepts. Vision Research, 41, 449-461.
2. Atkins, J. E., Jacobs, R. A., & Knill, D. C. (2003). Experience-dependent visual cue recalibration based on discrepancies between visual and haptic percepts. Vision Research, 43, 2603-2613.
3. Barthelmé, S., & Mamassian, P. (2010). Flexible mechanisms underlie the evaluation of visual confidence. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107, 20834-20839.
4. Block, H. J., & Bastian, A. J. (2010). Sensory reweighting in targeted reaching: Effects of conscious effort, error history, and target salience. Journal of Neurophysiology, 103, 206-217.
5. Burge, J., Girshick, A. R., & Banks, M. S. (2010). Visualhaptic adaptation is determined by relative reliability. Journal of Neuroscience, 30, 7714-7721.
6. Canon, L. K. (1970). Intermodality inconsistency of input and directed attention as determinants of the nature of adaptation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 84, 141-147.
7. Ernst, M. O. (2007). Learning to integrate arbitrary signals from vision and touch. Journal of Vision, 7(5):7, 1-14, http://www.journalofvision.org/content/7/5/7, doi:10.1167/7.5.7.
8. Ernst, M. O., & Banks, M. S. (2002). Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion. Nature, 415, 429-433.
9. Ernst, M. O., Banks, M. S., & Bülthoff, H. H. (2000). Touch can change visual slant perception. Nature Neuroscience, 3, 69-73.
10. Ernst, M. O., & Bülthoff, H. H. (2004). Merging the senses into a robust percept. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 162-169.
11. Ghahramani, Z., Wolpert, D. M., & Jordan, M. I. (1997). Computational models of sensorimotor integration. In P. G. Morasso&V. Sanguineti (Eds.), Self-organization, computational maps and motor control (pp. 117-147). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: North-Holland.
12. Greenwald, H. S., & Knill, D. C. (2009). A comparison of visuomotor cue integration strategies for object placement and prehension. Visual Neuroscience, 26, 63-72.
13. Greenwald, H. S., Knill, D. C., & Saunders, J. A. (2005). Integrating visual cues for motor control: A matter of time. Vision Research, 45, 1975-1989.
14. Gu, Y., Angelaki, D. E., & DeAngelis, G. C. (2008). Neural correlates of multisensory cue integration in macaqueMSTd. Nature Neuroscience, 11, 1201-1210.
15. Ho, Y.-X., Serwe, S., Trommershäuser, J., Maloney, L. T., & Landy, M. S. (2009). The role of visuohaptic experience in visually perceived depth. Journal of Neurophysiology, 101, 2789-2801.
16. Jacobs, R. A. (2002).What determines visual cue reliability? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 345-350.
17. Jacobs, R. A., & Fine, I. (1999). Experience-dependent integration of texture and motion cues to depth. Vision Research, 39, 4062-4075.
18. Knill, D. C. (2005). Reaching for visual cues to depth: The brain combines depth cues differently for motor control and perception. Journal of Vision, 5(2):2, 103-115, http://www.journalofvision.org/content/5/2/2, doi:10.1167/5.2.2.
19. Knill, D. C. (2007a). Robust cue integration: A Bayesian model and evidence from cue-conflict studies with stereoscopic and figure cues to slant. Journal of Vision, 7(7):5, 1-24, http://www.journalofvision.org/content/7/7/5, doi:10.1167/7.7.5.
20. Knill, D. C. (2007b). Learning Bayesian priors for depth perception. Journal of Vision, 7(8):13, 1-20, http://www.journalofvision.org/content/7/8/13, doi:10.1167/ 7.8.13.
21. Knill, D. C., & Kersten, D. (2004). Visuomotor sensitivity to visual information about surface orientation. Journal of Neurophysiology, 91, 1350-1366.
22. Knill, D. C., & Pouget, A. (2004). The Bayesian brain: The role of uncertainty in neural coding and computation. Trends in Neurosciences, 27, 712-719.
23. Knill, D. C., & Saunders, J. A. (2003). Do humans optimally integrate stereo and texture information for judgments of surface slant? Vision Research, 43, 2539-2558.
24. Landy, M. S., Maloney, L. T., Johnston, E. B., & Young, M. (1995). Measurement and modeling of depth cue combination: In defense of weak fusion. Vision Research, 35, 389-412.
25. Louw, S., Smeets, J. B. J., & Brenner, E. (2007). Judging surface slant for placing objects: A role for motion parallax. Experimental Brain Research, 183, 149-158.
26. Ma, W. J. (2010). Signal detection theory, uncertainty, and Poisson-like population codes. Vision Research, 50, 2308-2319.
27. Ma, W. J., Beck, J. M., Latham, P. E., & Pouget, A. (2006). Bayesian inference with probabilistic population codes. Nature Neuroscience, 9, 1432-1438.
28. Ma, W. J., & Pouget, A. (2008). Linking neurons to behavior in multisensory perception: A computational review. Brain Research, 1242, 4-12.
29. Muller, C. M. P., Brenner, E., & Smeets, J. B. J. (2007). Living up to optimal expectations. Journal of Vision, 7(3):2, 1-10, http://www.journalofvision.org/content/7/3/2, doi:10.1167/7.3.2.
30. Muller, C. M. P., Brenner, E., & Smeets, J. B. J. (2009a). Maybe they are all circles: Clues and cues. Journal of Vision, 9(9):10, 1-5, http://www.journalofvision.org/content/9/9/10, doi:10.1167/9.9.10.
31. Muller, C. M. P., Brenner, E., & Smeets, J. B. J. (2009b). Testing a counter-intuitive prediction of optimal cue combination. Vision Research, 49, 134-139.
32. Oruç, I., Maloney, L. T., & Landy, M. S. (2003). Weighted linear cue combination with possibly correlated error. Vision Research, 43, 2451-2468.
33. Seydell, A., Knill, D. C., & Trommershäuser, J. (2010). Adapting internal statistical models for interpreting visual cues to depth. Journal of Vision, 10(4):1, 1-27, http://www.journalofvision.org/content/10/4/1, doi:10.1167/10.4.1.
34. van Beers, R. J. (2009). Motor learning is optimally tuned to the properties of motor noise. Neuron, 63, 406-417.
35. van Beers, R. J., Haggard, P. & Wolpert, D. M. (2004). The role of execution noise in movement variability. Journal of Neurophysiology, 91, 1050-1063.
36. van Beers, R. J., Sittig, A. C., & Denier van der Gon, J. J. (1999). Integration of proprioceptive and visual position-information: An experimentally supported model. Journal of Neurophysiology, 81, 1355-1364.
37. van Beers, R. J., Wolpert, D. M., & Haggard, P. (2002). When feeling is more important than seeing in sensorimotor adaptation. Current Biology, 12, 834-837.
38. van Ee, R., van Dam, L. C. J., & Brouwer, G. J. (2005). Voluntary control and the dynamics of perceptual bi-stability. Vision Research, 45, 41-55.
39. van Mierlo, C. M., Louw, S., Smeets, J. B. J., & Brenner, E. (2009). Slant cues are processed with different latencies for the online control of movement. Journal of Vision, 9(3):25, 1-8, http://www.journalofvision.org/content/9/3/25, doi:10.1167/9.3.25.
40. Warren, D. H., & Schmitt, T. L. (1978). On the plasticity of visual-proprioceptive bias effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 4, 302-310.