Non-Conscious Processing of Motion Coherence Can Boost Conscious Access

PLoS ONE

Volumn 8, Issue 4, 2013, Pages

  Kaunitz, Lisandro ^a,b   Fracasso, Alessio ^a,c   Lingnau, Angelika ^a   Melcher, David ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TRENTO   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER   (United Kingdom)

^c UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; AWARENESS; CONTINUOUS FLASH SUPPRESSION; CONTROLLED STUDY; EYE MOVEMENT; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; MOVEMENT PERCEPTION; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; VISUAL FEEDBACK; VISUAL MASKING; VISUAL STIMULATION; VISUAL SYSTEM FUNCTION; VISUAL SYSTEM PARAMETERS; VISUAL THRESHOLD;

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CONSCIOUSNESS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MOTION PERCEPTION; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PHOTIC STIMULATION; VISION, OCULAR; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84876027558     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0060787     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Koch C (2003) The quest for consciousness: a neurobiological approach. Englewood, Colorado 80111: Ben Roberts.
2. Tsuchiya N, Koch C, (2005) Continuous flash suppression reduces negative afterimages. Nat Neurosci 8: 1096-1101.
3. Stuit SM, Paffen CLE, van der Smagt MJ, Verstraten FAJ, (2011) Suppressed images selectively affect the dominant percept during binocular rivalry. Journal of Vision 11(10) 7: 1-11.
4. Seth AK (2007) Models of consciousness. Scholarpedia 2: 1328+.
5. Dehaene S, Naccache L, Cohen L, Bihan DL, Mangin JF, et al. (2001) Cerebral mechanisms of word masking and unconscious repetition priming. Nat Neurosci 4: 752-758.
6. Lin Z, He S, (2009) Seeing the invisible: the scope and limits of unconscious processing in binocular rivalry. Progress in neurobiology 87: 195-211.
7. Kouider S, Dehaene S, (2007) Levels of processing during non-conscious perception: a critical review of visual masking. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 362: 857-875.
8. Van de Walle GA, Spelke ES, (1996) Spatiotemporal integration and object perception in infancy: perceiving unity versus form. Child Dev 67: 2621-2640.
9. Saygin AP, Wilson SM, Hagler DJJ, Bates E, Sereno MI, (2004) Point-light biological motion perception activates human premotor cortex. J Neurosci 24: 6181-6188.
10. Lingnau A, Petris S (2012) Action understanding within and outside the motor system: the role of task difficulty. Cerebral Cortex: doi:10.1093/cercor/bhs112.
11. Burr DC, Morrone MC, Ross J, (2001) Separate visual representations for perception and action revealed by saccadic eye movements. Curr Biol 11: 798-802.
12. Kawakami O, Kaneoke Y, Maruyama K, Kakigi R, Okada T, (2002) Visual detection of motion speed in humans: spatiotemporal analysis by fmri and meg. Hum Brain Mapp 16: 104-118.
13. Logothetis NK, Leopold DA, Sheinberg DL, (1996) What is rivalling during binocular rivalry?. Nature 380: 621-624.
14. Cook EP, Maunsell JHR, (2002) Dynamics of neuronal responses in macaque MT and VIP during motion detection. Nat Neurosci 5: 985-994.
15. Rees G, Friston K, Koch C, (2000) A direct quantitative relationship between the functional properties of human and macaque v5. Nat Neurosci 3: 716-723.
16. Stein T, Hebart MN, Sterzer P, (2011) Breaking continuous flash suppression: a new measure of unconscious processing during interocular suppression?. Front Hum Neurosci 5: 167.
17. Brainard DH, (1997) The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial vision 10: 433-436.
18. Burr DC, Santoro L, (2001) Temporal integration of optic flow, measured by contrast and coherence thresholds. Vision Res 41: 1891-1899.
19. Green DM, Swets JA (1966). New York: Peninsula Publishing, Los Altos, CA 94023, USA.
20. Gaillard R, Del Cul A, Naccache L, Vinckier F, Cohen L, et al. (2006) Nonconscious semantic processing of emotional words modulates conscious access. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 103: 7524-7529.
21. Purcell DG, Stewart AL, (1988) The face-detection effect: configuration enhances detection. Percept Psychophys 43: 355-366.
22. Lehmkuhle S, Fox R, (1975) Effect of binocular rivalry suppression on the motion aftereffect. Vision Research 15: 855-859.
23. Kaunitz L, Fracasso A, Melcher D, (2011) Unseen complex motion is modulated by attention and generates a visible aftereffect. Journal of Vision 11(13) 10: 1-9.
24. Wiesenfelder H, Blake R, (1990) The neural site of binocular rivalry relative to the analysis of motion in the human visual system. J Neurosci 10: 3880-3888.
25. Watson TL, Pearson J, Clifford CWG, (2004) Perceptual grouping of biological motion promotes binocular rivalry. Curr Biol 14: 1670-1674.
26. Watanabe K, Shimojo S, (2001) When sound affects vision: effects of auditory grouping on visual motion perception. Psychol Sci 12: 109-116.
27. Maruya K, Watanabe H, Watanabe M, (2008) Adaptation to invisible motion results in low-level but not high-level aftereffects. Journal of Vision 8(11) 7: 1-11.
28. Tong F, Meng M, Blake R, (2006) Neural bases of binocular rivalry. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10: 502-511.
29. Giese MA, Poggio T, (2003) Neural mechanisms for the recognition of biological movements. Nat Rev Neurosci 4: 179-192.
30. Mather G, Radford K, West S, (1992) Low-level visual processing of biological motion. Proc Biol Sci 249: 149-155.
31. Neri P, Morrone MC, Burr DC, (1998) Seeing biological motion. Nature 395: 894-896.
32. Vaina LM, Cowey A, Eskew RTJ, LeMay M, Kemper T, (2001) Regional cerebral correlates of global motion perception: evidence from unilateral cerebral brain damage. Brain 124: 310-321.
33. Puce A, Perrett D, (2003) Electrophysiology and brain imaging of biological motion. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 358: 435-445.
34. Thompson JC, Clarke M, Stewart T, Puce A, (2005) Configural processing of biological motion in human superior temporal sulcus. J Neurosci 25: 9059-9066.
35. Morrone MC, Burr DC, Vaina LM, (1995) Two stages of visual processing for radial and circular motion. Nature 376: 507-509.
36. Webster M, MacLin O, (1999) Figural aftereffects in the perception of faces. Psychon Bull Rev 6(4): 647-653.
37. Stein T, Sterzer P, (2011) High-level face shape adaptation depends on visual awareness: evidence from continuous flash suppression. Journal of Vision 11(8) 5: 1-14.
38. Alais D, Melcher D, (2007) Strength and coherence of binocular rivalry depends on shared stimulus complexity. Vision Research 47: 269-279.
39. Moradi F, Koch C, Shimojo S, (2005) Face adaptation depends on seeing the face. Neuron 45: 169-175.