Binocular rivalry alternations and their relation to visual adaptation

Frontiers in Human Neuroscience

Volumn , Issue MARCH 2012, 2012, Pages 1-5

  Roumani, Daphne ^a   Moutoussis, Konstantinos ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ATHENS   (Greece)

Author keywords

Adaptation; Binocular rivalry; Perceptual alternations

Indexed keywords

ASSOCIATION; ATTENTION; HUMAN; NERVE CELL; NOISE; PERCEPTION; RECEPTIVE FIELD; RETINA RIVALRY; REVIEW; STIMULUS RESPONSE; VISUAL ADAPTATION; VISUAL CORTEX; VISUAL SYSTEM FUNCTION;

EID: 84859248221     PISSN: 16625161     EISSN: 16625161     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00035     Document Type: Review

References (70)

1. Alais, D., and Blake, R. (1998). Interactions between global motion and local binocular rivalry. Vision Res. 38, 637-644.
2. Alais, D., Cass, J., O'Shea, R. P., and Blake, R. (2010). Visual sensitivity underlying changes in visual consciousness. Curr. Biol. 20, 1362-1367.
3. Alais, D., and Melcher, D. (2007). Strength and coherence of binocular rivalry depends on shared stimulus complexity. Vision Res. 47, 269-279.
4. Andrews, T. J., and Lotto, R. B. (2004). Fusion and rivalry are dependent on the perceptual meaning of visual stimuli. Curr. Biol. 14, 418-423.
5. Bartels, A., and Logothetis, N. K. (2010). Binocular rivalry: a time-dependence of eye and stimulus contributions. J. Vis. 10, 1-14.
6. Blake, R. (1989). A neural theory of binocular rivalry. Psychol. Rev. 96, 145-167.
7. Blake, R., and Logothetis, N. (2002). Visual competition. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 13, 1-11.
8. Blake, R., Sobel, K., and Gilroy, L. A. (2003). Visual motion retards alternations between conflicting perceptual interpretations. Neuron 39, 869-878.
9. Blake, R., Tadin, D., Sobel, K. V., Raissian, T. A., and Chong, S. C. (2006). Strength of early visual adaptation depends on visual awareness. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 13, 4783-4788.
10. Blake, R., Yu, K., and Lokey, M. (1998). Binocular rivalry and motion perception. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 10, 46-60.
11. Blake, R., and Wilson, H. (2011). Binocular vision. Vision Res. 51, 754-770.
12. Brascamp, J. W., Knapen, T. H. J., Kanai, R., van Ee, R., and van den Berg, A. V. (2007). Flash suppression and flash facilitation in binocular rivalry. J. Vis. 7, 1-12.
13. Brascamp, J. W., Pearson, J., Blake, R., and van den Berg, A. V. (2009). Intermittent ambiguous stimuli: implicit memory causes periodic perceptual alternations. J. Vis. 9, 1-23.
14. Brascamp, J. W., van Ee, R., Noest, A. J., Jacobs, R. H. A. H., and van den Berg, A. V. (2006). The time course of binocular rivalry reveals a fundamental role of noise. J. Vis. 6, 1244-1256.
15. Carlson, T. A., and He, S. (2004). Competing global representations fail to initiate binocular rivalry. Neuron 43, 907-914.
16. Carrasco, M., Ling, S., and Read, S. (2004). Attention alters appearance. Nat. Neurosci. 7, 308-313.
17. Carter, O., and Cavanagh, P. (2007). Onset rivalry: brief presentation isolates an early independent phase of perceptual competition. PLOS One 2:e343. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0000343
18. Chen, Y. C., Yeh, S. L., and Spence, C. (2011). Crossmodal constraints on human perceptual awareness: auditory semantic modulation of binocular rivalry. Front. Psychol. 2:212. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011. 00212
19. Chen, X., and He, S. (2004). Local factors determine the stabilization of monocular ambiguous and binocular rivalry stimuli. Curr. Biol. 14, 1013-1017.
20. Chong, S. C., and Blake, R. (2006). Exogenous attention and endogenous attention influence initial dominance in binocular rivalry. Vision Res. 46, 1794-1803.
21. Clifford, C. W., Webster, M. A., Stanley, G. B., Stocker, A. A., Kohn, A., Sharpee, T. O., and Schwartz, O. (2007). Visual adaptation: neural, psychological and computational aspects. Vision Res. 47, 3125-3131.
22. Fox, R., and Check, R. (1972). Independence between binocular rivalry suppression duration and magnitude of suppression. J. Exp. Psychol. 93, 283-289.
23. Gigante, G., Mattia, M., Braun, J., and Del Giudice, P. (2009). Bistable perception modeled as competing stochastic integrations at two levels. PLoS Comput. Biol. 5:e1000430. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000430
24. Kamphuisen, A. P., Bauer, M., and van Ee, R. (2008). No evidence for widespread synchronized networks in binocular rivalry: MEG frequency tagging entrains primarily early visual cortex. J. Vis. 8, 4.1-4.8.
25. Kang, M. S., and Blake, R. (2010). What causes alternations in dominance during binocular rivalry. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 72, 179-186.
26. Keliris, G., Logothetis, N., and Tolias, A. (2010). The role of primary visual cortex in perceptual suppression of salient visual stimuli. J. Neurosci. 30, 12353-12365.
27. Kim, Y-J., Grabowecky, M., and Suzuki, S. (2006). Stochastic resonance in binocular rivalry. Vision Res. 46, 392-406.
28. Klink, P. C., van Ee, R., Nijs, M. M., Brouwer, G. J., Noest, A. J., and van Wezel, R. J. A. (2008a). Early interactions between neuronal adaptation and voluntary control determine perceptual choices in bistable vision. J. Vis. 8, 16.1-18.
29. Klink, P. C., van Ee, R., and van Wezel, R. J. A. (2008b). General validity of Levelt's propositions reveals common computational mechanisms for visual rivalry. PLoS One 3:e3473. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0003473
30. Knapen, T., Brascamp, J., van Ee, R., and Blake, R. (2011). The role of frontal and parietal areas in bistable perception. J. Neurosci. 31, 10293-10301.
31. Kovacs, I., Papathomas, T. V., Yang, M., and Fehiotar, A. (1996). When the brain changes its mind: interocular grouping during binocular rivalry. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 93, 15508-15511.
32. Lankheet, M. (2006). Unraveling adaptation and mutual inhibition in rivalry. J. Vis. 6, 304-310.
33. Lehky, S. R. (1995). Binocular rivalry is not chaotic. Proc. Biol. Sci. 259, 71-176.
34. Leopold, D., and Logothetis, N. (1996). Activity changes in early visual cortex reflect monkeys' percepts during binocular rivalry. Nature 379, 549-553.
35. Leopold, D., and Logothetis, N. (1999). Multistable Phenomena: changing views in perception. Trends Cogn. Sci. 3, 254-264.
36. Leopold, D. A., Wilke, M., Maier, A., and Logothetis, N. K. (2002). Stable perception of visually ambiguous patterns. Nat. Neurosci. 5, 605-609.
37. Levelt, W. (1965). On Binocular Rivalry. Soesterberg, Netherlands: Institute for Perception RVO-TNO.
38. Lin, Z., and He, S. (2009). Seeing the invisible: the scope and limits of unconscious processing in binocular rivalry. Prog. Neurobiol. 87, 195-211.
39. Logothetis, N. K. (1998). Single units and conscious vision. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 353, 1801-1818.
40. Lumer, E. D., Friston, K., and Rees, G. (1998). Neural correlates of perceptual rivalry in the human brain. Science 280, 1930-1934.
41. Meng, M., and Tong, F. (2004). Can attention selectively bias bistable perception? Differences between binocular rivalry and ambiguous figures. J. Vis. 4, 539-551.
42. Nguyen, V. A., Freeman, A. W., and Alais, D. (2003). Increasing depth of binocular rivalry suppression along two visual pathways. Vision Res. 43, 2003-2008.
43. Noest, A. J., van Ee, R., Nijs, M. M., and van Wezel, R. J. A. (2007). Percept-choice sequences driven by interrupted ambiguous stimuli: A low-level neural model. J. Vision 7(8):10, 1-14.
44. Paffen, C. L. E., and Alais, D. (2011). Attentional modulation of binocular rivalry. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 5:105. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2011.00105
45. Paffen, C. L. E., Alais, D., and Verstraten, F. A. J. (2006). Attentions speeds binocular rivalry. Psychol. Sci. 17, 752-756.
46. Pearson, J., and Brascamp, J. (2008). Sensory memory for ambiguous vision. Trends Cogn. Sci. 12, 334-341.
47. Pearson, J., and Clifford, C. (2005). Mechanisms selectively engaged in rivalry: normal vision habituates, rivalrous vision primes. Vision Res. 45, 707-714.
48. Pearson, J., Tadin, D., and Blake, R. (2007). The effects of transcranial magnetic stimulation on visual rivalry. J. Vis. 7, 2.1-2.11.
49. Polonsky, A., Blake, R., Braun, J., and Heeger, D. J. (2000). Neuronal activity in human primary visual cortex correlates with perception during binocular rivalry. Nat. Neurosci. 3, 1153-1159.
50. Roeber, U., Veser, S., Schröger, E., and O'Shea, R. P. (2011). On the role of attention in binocular rivalry: electrophysiological evidence. PLoS One 6:e22612. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0022612
51. Seely, J., and Chow, C. (2011). Role of mutual inhibition in rivalry. J. Neurophysiol. 106, 2136-2150.
52. Shpiro, A., Moreno-Bote, R., Rubin, N., and Rinzel, J. (2009). Balance between noise and adaptation in competition models of perceptual bistabilty. J. Comput. Neurosci. 27, 37-54.
53. Stein, T., and Sterzer, P. (2011). High-level face adaptation depends on visual awareness: evidence from continuous flash suppression. J. Vis. 11, 5.1-14.
54. Sterzer, P., and Kleinschmidt, A. (2007). A neural basis for inference in perceptual ambiguity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 104, 323-328.
55. Sterzer, P., Kleinschmidt, A., and Rees, G. (2009). The neural bases of multistable perception. Trends Cogn. Sci. 13, 310-318.
56. Stuit, S. M., Paffen, C. L. E., vander Smagt, M. J., and Verstraten, F. A. J. (2011). What is grouping during binocular rivalry? Front. Hum. Neurosci. 5:117. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2011.00117
57. Theodoni, P., Panagiotaropoulos, T. I., Kapoor, V., Logothetis, N., and Deco, G. (2011a). Cortical microcircuit dynamics mediating binocular rivalry: the role of adaptation and inhibition. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 5:145. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2011.00145
58. Theodoni, P., Kovács, G., Greenlee, M. W., and Deco, G. (2011b). Neuronal adaptation effects in decision making. J. Neurosci. 31, 234-246.
59. van Boxtel, J. J. A., Alais, D., and van Ee, R. (2008). Retinotopic and non-retinotopic stimulus encoding in binocular rivalry and the involvement of feedback. J. Vis. 8, 17.1-17.10.
60. van Ee, R. (2009). Stochastic variations in sensory awareness are driven by noisy neuronal adaptation: evidence from serial correlations in perceptual bistability. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A Opt. Image Sci. Vis. 26, 2612-2622.
61. van Ee, R. (2011). Percept-switch nucleation in binocular rivalry reveals local adaptation characteristics of early visual processing. J. Vis. 11, 13.1-13.12.
62. van Ee, R., van Boxtel, J. J. A. Parker, A. L., and Alais, D. (2009). Multisensory congruency as a mechanism for attentional control over perceptual selection. J. Neurosci. 29, 11641-11649.
63. van Ee, R., van Dam, L. C. J., and Brouwer, G. J. (2005). Voluntary control and the dynamics of perceptual bistability. Vision Res. 45, 41-55.
64. Wheatstone, C. (1838). Contributions to the physiology of vision - part the first. on some remarkable and hitherto unobserved phenomena of binocular vision. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 128, 371-394.
65. Wilson, H. R. (2003). Computational evidence for a rivalry hierarchy in vision. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 100, 14499-14503.
66. Wilson, H. R. (2007). Minimal physiological conditions for binocular rivalry and rivalry memory. Vision Res. 47, 2741-2750.
67. Wolfe, J. (1986). Stereopsis and binocular rivalry. Psychol. Rev. 93, 269-282.
68. Zaretskaya, N., Thielscher, A., Logothetis, N. K., and Bartels, A. (2010). Disrupting parietal function prolongs dominance durations in binocular rivalry. Curr. Biol. 20, 2106-2111.
69. Zhang, P., Jamison, K., Engel, S., He, B., and He, S. (2011). Binocular rivalry requires visual attention. Neuron 71, 362-369.
70. Zhou, W., Jiang, Y., He, S., and Chen, D. (2010). Olfaction modulates visual perception in binocular rivalry. Curr. Biol. 20, 1356-1358.