Understanding attentional modulation of binocular rivalry: A framework based on biased competition

Frontiers in Human Neuroscience

Volumn , Issue DECEMBER, 2011, Pages

  Dieter, Kevin Conrad ^a   Tadin, Duje ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Biased competition; Binocular rivalry; Bistable perception; Visual attention

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTENTION; BINOCULAR VISION; COMPETITION; CONFLICT; EYE DOMINANCE; EYE MOVEMENT; HUMAN; MODULATION; RECEPTIVE FIELD; SENSORY STIMULATION; VISION; VISUAL STIMULATION; VISUAL SYSTEM;

EID: 84933678749     PISSN: 16625161     EISSN: 16625161     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2011.00155     Document Type: Article

References (122)

1. Alais, D., and Blake, R. (1998). Interactions between global motion and local binocular rivalry. Vision Res.38, 637-644.
2. Alais, D., and Blake, R. (ed.). (2005). Binocular Rivalry. Cambridge: MIT Press.
3. Alais, D., O'Shea, R., Mesana-Alais, C., and Wilson, I. (2000). On binocular alternation. Perception 29, 1437-1445.
4. Alais, D., van Boxtel, J. J., Parker, A., and van Ee R. (2010a). Attending to auditory signals slows visual alternations in binocular rivalry. Vision Res. 50, 929-935.
5. Alais, D., Cass, J., O'Shea, R. P., and Blake, R. (2010b). Visual sensitivity underlying changes in visual consciousness. Curr. Biol. 20, 1362-1367.
6. Alpers, G. W., and Pauli, P. (2006). Emotional pictures predominate in binocular rivalry. Cogn. Emot. 20, 596-607.
7. Anderson, E., Siegel, E. H., Bliss-Moreau, E., and Barrett, L. F. (2011). The visual impact of gossip. Science 332, 1446-1448.
8. Andrews, T., and Lotto, R. (2004). Fusion and rivalry are dependent on the perceptual meaning of visual stimuli. Curr. Biol. 14, 418-423.
9. Arnold, D. H. (2011). Why is binocular rivalry uncommon? Discrepant monocular images in the real world. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 5:116. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2011.00116
10. Bannerman, R. L., Milders, M., De Gelder, B., and Sahraie, A. (2008). Influence of emotional facial expressions on binocular rivalry. Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt. 28, 317-326.
11. Bartels, A., and Logothetis, N. K. (2010). Binocular rivalry: a time dependence of eye and stimulus contributions. J. Vis. 10, 3.
12. Beck, D. M., and Kastner, S. (2009). Top-down and bottom-up mechanisms in biasing competition in the human brain. Vision Res. 49, 1154-1165.
13. Behrmann, M., Geng, J. J., and Shom-stein, S. (2004). Parietal cortex and attention. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14, 212-217.
14. Blake, R. (1989). A neural theory of binocular rivalry. Psychol. Rev. 96, 145-167.
15. Blake, R., and Logothetis, N. (2002). Visual competition. Nat. Rev. Neu-rosci. 3, 13-23.
16. Blake, R., and Wilson, H. (2011). Binocular vision. Vision Res. 51, 754-770.
17. Bonneh, Y., Sagi, D., and Karni, A. (2001). A transition between eye and object rivalry determined by stimulus coherence. Vision Res. 41, 981-989.
18. Breese, B. B. (1899). On inhibition. Psychol. Monogr. 3, 1-65.
19. Britz, J., Pitts, M. A., and Michel, C. M. (2010). Right parietal brain activity precedes perceptual alternation during binocular rivalry. Hum. Brain Mapp. 32, 1432-1442.
20. Broadbent, D. E. (1958). Perception and Communication. London: Perg-amon.
21. Campos, E. (1995). Amblyopia. Surv. Ophthalmol. 40, 23-39.
22. Carrasco, M. (2006). Covert attention increases contrast sensitivity: psy-chophysical, neurophysiological and neuroimaging studies. Prog. Brain Res. 154, 33-70.
23. 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/jour-nal.pone.0000343
24. Carter, O. L., Presti, D. E., Calliste-mon, C., Ungerer, Y., Liu, G. B., and Pettigrew, J. D. (2005). Meditation alters perceptual rivalry in Tibetan Buddhist monks. Curr. Biol. 15, R412-R413.
25. Cavanagh, P., and Holcombe, A. O. (2006). Successive rivalry does not occur without attention. J. Vis. 6, 818. doi: 10.1167/6.6.818
26. Chen, X., and He, S. (2004). Local factors determine the stabilization of monocular ambiguous and binocular rivalry stimuli. Curr. Biol. 14, 1013-1017.
27. Chong, S., and Blake, R. (2006). Exogenous attention and endogenous attention influence initial dominance in binocular rivalry. Vision Res. 46, 1794-1803.
28. Chong, S., Tadin, D., and Blake, R. (2005). Endogenous attention prolongs dominance durations in binocular rivalry. J. Vis. 5, 1004-1012.
29. Chopin, A., and Mamassian, P. (2010). Task usefulness affects perception of rivalrous images. Psychol. Sci. 21, 1886-1893.
30. Ciaramitaro, V.M., Mitchell, J.F., Stoner, G.R., Reynolds, J.H., and Boynton, G.M. (2011). Object-based attention to one of two superimposed surfaces alters responses in human early visual cortex. J. Neurophysiol. 105, 1258-1265.
31. Cumming, B. G., and DeAngelis, G. C. (2001). The physiology of stere-opsis. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 24, 203-238.
32. de Belsunce, S., and Sireteanu, R. (1991). The time course of interocular suppression in normal and amblyopic subjects. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 32, 2645-2652.
33. Desimone, R. (1998). Visual attention mediated by biased competition in extrastriate visual cortex. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 353, 1245-1255.
34. Desimone, R., and Duncan, J. (1995). Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 18, 193-222.
35. Diaz-Caneja, E. (1928). On binocular alternation. Ann. Ocul. 721-731.
36. Dieter, K. C., Melnick, M. D., and Tadin, D. (2010). Eye-specific plasticity induced by binocular rivalry training. J. Vis. 10, 19. doi: 10.1167/10.15.19
37. Egeth, H., and Yantis, S. (1997). Visual attention: control, representation, and time course. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 48, 269-297.
38. Fischer, J., and Whitney, D. (2009). Attention narrows position tuning of population responses in V1. Curr. Biol. 19, 1356-1361.
39. Freeman, A. (2005). Multistage model for binocular rivalry. J. Neurophysiol. 94, 4412-4420.
40. George, R. W. (1936). The significance of the fluctuations experienced in observing ambiguous figures and in binocular rivalry. J. Gen. Psychol. 15, 39-61.
41. Hancock, S., and Andrews, T. J. (2007). The role of voluntary and involuntary attention in selecting perceptual dominance during binocular rivalry. Perception 36, 288-298.
42. He, S., Jiang, Y., and Chen, X. (2007). Stabilizing bistable visual patterns through interocular suppression, crowding, and inattention. J. Vis. 7, 362. doi:10.1167/7.9.362
43. Helmholtz, H. von. (1925). Treatise on Physiological Optics, Vol. 3, trans. J. P. C. Southall. New York: Dover.
44. Hering, E. (1879/1942). "Spatial sense and movements of the eye,"in Hand-buch der Physiologie,ed. L. Hermann (Leipzig: Vogel), 3.
45. Hochstein, S., and Ahissar, M. (2002). View from the top: hierarchies and reverse hierarchies in the visual system. Neuron 36, 791-804.
46. Hol, K., Koene, A., and van Ee, R. (2003). Attention-biased multi-stable surface percep tion in three-dimensional structure-from-motion. J. Vis. 3, 486-498.
47. James, W. (1890). The Principles of Psychology. New York: Henry Holt.
48. Kamphuisen, A. P., van Wezel, R. J. A., and van Ee, R. (2007). Inter-ocular transfer of stimulus cueing in dominance selection at the onset of binocular rivalry. Vision Res. 47, 1142-1144.
49. Kanai, R., Bahrami, B., and Rees, G. (2010). Human parietal cortex structure predicts individual differences in perceptual rivalry. Curr. Biol. 20, 1626-1630.
50. Kastner, S., De Weerd, P., Desimone, R., and Ungerleider, L. G. (1998). Mechanisms of directed attention in the human extrastriate cortex as revealed by functional MRI. Science 282, 108-111.
51. Kastner, S., and Ungerleider, L. G. (2000). Mechanisms of visual attention in the human cortex. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 23, 315-341.
52. Khoe, W., Mitchell, J. F., Reynolds, J. H., and Hillyard, S. A. (2008). ERP evidence that surface-based attention biases interocular competition during rivalry. J. Vis. 8, 18.1-18.11.
53. Klink, P. C., Brascamp, J. W., Blake, R., and Van Wezel, R. J. A. (2010). Experience-driven plasticity in binocular vision. Curr. Biol. 20, 1464-1469.
54. Knapen, T., Brascamp, J., Pearson, J., van Ee, R, and Blake R. (2011). The role of frontal and parietal areas in bistable perception. J. Neurosci. 31, 10293-10301.
55. Kovács, I., Papathomas, T. V., Yang, M., and Fehér, A. (1996). When the brain changes its mind: inte-rocular grouping during binocular rivalry. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 93, 15508-15511.
56. Lack, L. C. (1978). Selective Attention and the Control of Binocular Rivalry. Paris: Mouton.
57. Lavie, N. (2005). Distracted and confused?: selective attention under load. Trends Cogn. Sci. (Regul. Ed.) 9, 75-82.
58. Lee, S. H. (2004). Binocular battles on multiple fronts. Trends Cogn. Sci. (Regul. Ed.) 8, 148-151.
59. Lee, S. H., and Blake, R. (1999). Rival ideas about binocular rivalry. Vision Res. 39, 1447-1454.
60. Leopold, D., Wilke, M., Maier, A., and Logothetis, N. (2002). Stable perception of visually ambiguous patterns. Nat. Neurosci. 5, 605-609.
61. Leopold, D. A., and Logothetis, N. K. (1999). Multistable phenomena: changingviewsinperception.Trends Cogn. Sci. (Regul. Ed.) 3, 254-264.
62. Levelt, W. J. M. (1968). On Binocular Rivalry. Paris: Mouton.
63. Levi, D. M., and Li, R. W. (2009). Improving the performance of the amblyopic visual system. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 364, 399-407.
64. Liu, T., Larsson, J., and Carrasco, M. (2007). Feature-based attention modulates orientation-selective responses in human visual cortex. Neuron 55, 313-323.
65. Logothetis, N. K. (1998). Single units and conscious vision. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 353, 1801-1818.
66. Logothetis, N. K., Leopold, D., and Sheinberg, D. (1996). What is rivaling during binocular rivalry? Nature 380, 621-624.
67. Luck, S. J., Chelazzi, L., Hillyard, S. A., and Desimone, R. (1997). Neural mechanisms of spatial selective attention in areas V1,V2, and V4 of macaque visual cortex. J. Neuro-physiol. 77, 24-42.
68. Lumer, E., Friston, K., and Rees, G. (1998). Neural correlates of perceptual rivalry in the human brain. Science 280, 1930-1934.
69. McDougall, W. (1903). The physiological factors of the attention-process (III). Mind 12, 473-488.
70. McMains, S., and Kastner, S. (2011). Interactions of top-down and bottom-up mechanisms in human visual cortex. J. Neurosci. 31, 587-597.
71. Meng, M., and Tong, F. (2004). Can attention selectively bias bistable perception? Differences between binocular rivalry and ambiguous figures. J. Vis. 4, 539-551.
72. Mishra, J., and Hillyard, S. A. (2009). Endogenous attention selection during binocular rivalry at early stages of visual processing. Vision Res. 49, 1073-1080.
73. Mitchell, J., Stoner, G., and Reynolds, J. (2004). Object-based attention determines dominance in binocular rivalry. Nature 429, 410-413.
74. Moran, J., and Desimone, R. (1985). Selective attention gates visual processing in the extrastriate cortex. Science 229, 782-784.
75. Moray, N. (1970). Attention: Selective Processes in Vision and Hearing. New York: Academic Press.
76. Motter, B. C. (1993). Focal attention produces spatially selective processing in visual cortical areas V1, V2, andV4 in the presence of competing stimuli. J. Neurophysiol. 70, 909-919.
77. Mueller, T. J., and Blake, R. (1989). A fresh look at the temporal dynamics of binocular rivalry. Biol. Cybern. 61, 223-232.
78. O'Connor, D. H., Fukui, M. M., Pinsk, M. A., and Kastner, S. (2002). Attention modulates responses in the human lateral geniculate nucleus. Nat. Neurosci. 5, 1203-1209.
79. Ooi, T. L., and He, Z. J. (1999). Binocular rivalry and visual awareness: the role of attention. Perception 28, 551-574.
80. Ooi, T. L., and He, Z. J. (2003). A distributed intercortical processing of binocular rivalry: psychophysical evidence. Perception 32, 155-166.
81. Paffen, C. L. E., and Alais, D. (2011). Attentional modulation of binocular rivalry. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 5:105. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2011.00105
82. Paffen, C. L. E., Alais, D., and Ver-straten, F. A. J. (2006). Attention speeds binocular rivalry. Psychol. Sci. 17, 752-756.
83. Paffen, C. L. E., and Hooge, I. T. C. (2011). The effect of set size on the dynamics of binocular rivalry. Seeing Perceiving 24, 19-35.
84. Paffen, C. L. E., and van der Stigchel, S. (2010). Shifting spatial attention makes you flip: exogenous visual attention triggers perceptual alternations during binocular rivalry. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 72, 1237-1243.
85. Paffen, C. L. E., Verstraten, F. A. J., and Vidnyánszky, Z. (2008). Attention-based perceptual learning increases binocular rivalry suppression of irrelevant visual features. J. Vis. 8, 25.21-11.
86. Pastukhov, A., and Braun, J. (2007). Perceptual reversals need no prompting by attention. J. Vis. 7, 5.
87. Pearson, J., and Clifford, C. (2004). Determinants of visual awareness following interruptions during rivalry. J. Vis. 4, 196-202.
88. Pearson, J., Tadin, D., and Blake, R. (2007). The effects of transcra-nial magnetic stimulation on visual rivalry. J. Vis. 7, 2.1-11.
89. Peckham, R. H. (1936). Eye movements during "retinal rivalry." Am. J. Psy-chol. 48, 43-63.
90. Reynolds, J. H., and Chelazzi, L. (2004). Attentional modulation of visual processing. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 27, 611-647.
91. Reynolds, J. H., Chelazzi, L., and Desimone, R. (1999). Competitive mechanisms subserve attention in macaque areas V2 and V4. J. Neu-rosci. 19, 1736-1753.
92. Roberts, M., Delicato, L. S., Herrero, J., Gieselmann, M. A., and Thiele, A. (2007). Attention alters spatial integration in macaque V1 in an eccentricity-dependent manner. Nat. Neurosci. 10, 1483-1491.
93. 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/jour-nal.pone.0022612
94. Serences, J. T., Schwarzbach, J., Courtney, S. M., Golay, X., and Yantis, S. (2004). Control of object-based attention in human cortex. Cereb. Cortex 14, 1346-1357.
95. Serences, J. T., and Yantis, S. (2006). Selective visual attention and perceptual coherence. Trends Cogn. Sci. (Regul. Ed.) 10, 38-45.
96. Shimojo, S., and Nakayama, K. (1990). Real world occlusion constraints and binocular-rivalry. Vision Res. 30, 69-80.
97. Silver, M. A., and Logothetis, N. K. (2004). Grouping and segmentation in binocular rivalry. Vision Res. 44, 1675-1692.
98. Silver, M. A., and Logothetis, N. K. (2007). Temporal frequency and contrast tagging bias the type of competition in interocular switch rivalry. Vision Res. 47, 532-543.
99. Simons, K. (2005). Amblyopia characterization, treatment, and prophylaxis. Surv. Ophthalmol. 50, 123-166.
100. Stanley, J., Carter, O., and Forte, J. (2011). Color and luminance influence, but can not explain, binocular rivalry onset bias. PLoS ONE 6, e18978. doi:10.1371/jour-nal.pone.0018978
101. Stoner, G. R., Mitchell, J. F., Fallah, M., and Reynolds, J. H. (2005). Interacting competitive selection in attention and binocular rivalry. Prog. Brain Res. 149, 227-234.
102. Su, Y. R., He, Z. J., and Ooi, T. L. (2011). Revealing boundary-contour based surface representation through the time course of binocular rivalry. Vision Res. 51, 1288-1296.
103. Suzuki, S., and Grabowecky, M. (2007). Long-term speeding in perceptual switches mediated by attention-dependent plasticity in cortical visual processing. Neuron 56, 741-753.
104. Suzuki, S., and Peterson, M. A. (2000). Multiplicative effects of intention on the perception of bistable apparent motion. Psychol. Sci. 11, 202-209.
105. Tadin, D., Lappin, J. S., Blake, R., and Grossman, E. D. (2002). What constitutes an efficient reference frame for vision? Nat. Neurosci. 5, 1010-1015.
106. Tong, F., Meng, M., and Blake, R. (2006). Neural bases of binocular rivalry. Trends Cogn. Sci. (Regul. Ed.) 10, 502-511.
107. Toppino, T. C. (2003). Reversible-figure perception: mechanisms of intentional control. Percept. Psychophys. 65, 1285-1295.
108. Treue, S. (2001). Neural correlates of attention in primate visual cortex. Trends Neurosci. 24, 295-300.
109. van Bogaert, E. A., Ooi, T. L., and He, Z. J. (2008). The monocular-boundary-contour mechanism in binocular surface representation and suppression. Perception 37, 1197-1215.
110. van Dam, L. C. J., and van Ee, R. (2006). Retinal image shifts, but not eye movements per se, cause alternations in awareness during binocular rivalry. J. Vis. 6, 1172-1179.
111. van Ee, R., van Boxtel, J. J. A., Parker, A. L., and Alais, D. (2009). Mul-tisensory congruency as a mechanism for attentional control over perceptual selection. J. Neurosci. 29, 11641-11649.
112. van Ee, R., van Dam, L., and Brouwer, G. (2005). Voluntary control and the dynamics of perceptual bi-stability. Vision Res. 45, 41-55.
113. Washburn, M. F., and Gillette, A. (1933). Studies from the psychological laboratory of Vassar College: LXII. Motor factors in voluntary control of cube perspective fluctuations and retinal rivalry fluctuations. Am. J. Psychol. 45, 315-319.
114. Wertheimer, M. (1938). "Laws of organization in perceptual forms," in A Source Book of Gestalt Psychology, ed. W. D. Ellis (London: Harcourt Brace), 71-88.
115. Wilson, H. R. (2003). Computational evidence for a rivalry hierarchy in vision. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 100, 14499-14503.
116. 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.
117. Xu, J. P., He, Z. J., and Ooi, T. L. (2010). Effectively reducing sensory eye dominance with a push-pull perceptual learning protocol. Curr. Biol. 20, 1864-1868.
118. Xu, J. P., He, Z. J., and Ooi, T. L. (2011a). Perceptual learning to reduce sensory eye dominance beyond the focus of top-down visual attention. Vision Res. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2011.05.013
119. Xu, J. P., He, Z. J., and Ooi, T. L. (2011b). Push-pull training reduces foveal sensory dominance within the early visual channels. Vision Res. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2011.06.005
120. Yang, E., Zald, D. H., and Blake, R. (2007). Fearful expressions gain preferential access to awareness during continuous flash suppression. Emotion 7, 882-886.
121. Zaretskaya, N., Thielscher, A., Logo-thetis, N. K., and Bartels, A. (2010). Disrupting parietal function prolongs dominance durations in binocular rivalry. Curr. Biol. 20, 2106-2111.
122. Zhang, P., Jamison, K., Engel, S., He, B., and He, S. (2011). Binocular rivalry requires visual attention. Neuron 71, 362-369.