Search

Previous studies revealed that there are idiosyncratic preferences to perceive certain motion directions in front during motion transparency depth rivalry (Mamassian & Wallace, 2010; Schütz, 2014). Meanwhile, other studies reported idiosyncratic preferences in binocular rivalry during the onset stage (Carter & Cavanagh, 2007; Stanley, Carter, & Forte, 2011). Here we investigated the relationship of idiosyncratic preferences in transparent motion and binocular rivalry. We presented two dot clouds that were moving in opposite directions. In the transparent motion condition, both dot clouds were presented to both eyes and participants had to report the dot cloud they perceived in front. In the binocular rivalry condition, the dot clouds were presented to different eyes and participants had to report the dominant dot cloud. There were strong idiosyncratic directional preferences in transparent motion and rather weak directional preferences in binocular rivalry. In general, binocular rivalry was dominated by biases in contrast polarity, whereas transparent motion was dominated by biases in motion direction. A circular correlation analysis showed no correlation between directional preferences in transparent motion and binocular rivalry. These findings show that idiosyncratic preferences in a visual feature can be dissociated at different stages of processing.

Binocular rivalry has become an important index of visual performance, both to measure ocular dominance or its plasticity, and to index bistable perception. We investigated its interindividual variability across 50 normal adults and found that the duration of dominance phases in rivalry is linked with the duration of dominance phases in another bistable phenomenon (structure from motion). Surprisingly, it also correlates with the strength of center-surround interactions (indexed by the tilt illusion), suggesting a common mechanism supporting both competitive interactions: center-surround and rivalry. In a subset of 34 participants, we further investigated the variability of short-term ocular dominance plasticity, measured with binocular rivalry before and after 2 hours of monocular deprivation. We found that ocular dominance shifts in favor of the deprived eye and that a large portion of ocular dominance variability after deprivation can be predicted from the dynamics of binocular rivalry before deprivation. The single best predictor is the proportion of mixed percepts (phases without dominance of either eye) before deprivation, which is positively related to ocular dominance unbalance after deprivation. Another predictor is the duration of dominance phases, which interacts with mixed percepts to explain nearly 50% of variance in ocular dominance unbalance after deprivation. A similar predictive power is achieved by substituting binocular rivalry dominance phase durations with tilt illusion magnitude, or structure from motion phase durations. Thus, we speculate that ocular dominance plasticity is modulated by two types of signals, estimated from psychophysical performance before deprivation, namely, interocular inhibition (promoting binocular fusion, hence mixed percepts) and inhibition for perceptual competition (promoting longer dominance phases and stronger center-surround interactions).

We used a novel method to capture the spatial dominance pattern of competing motion fields at rivalry onset. When rivaling velocities were different, the participants reported center-surround segmentation: The slower stimuli often dominated in the center while faster motion persisted along the borders. The size of the central static/slow field scaled with the stimulus size. The central dominance was time-locked to the static stimulus onset but was disrupted if the dynamic stimulus was presented later. We then used the same stimuli as masks in an interocular suppression paradigm. The local suppression strengths were probed with targets at different eccentricities. Consistent with the center-surround segmentation, target speed and location interacted with mask velocities. Specifically, suppression power of the slower masks was nonhomogenous with eccentricity, providing a potential explanation for center-surround velocity-based segmentation. This interaction of speed, eccentricity, and timing has implications for motion processing and interocular suppression. The influence of different masks on which target features get suppressed predicts that some "unconscious effects" are not generalizable across masks and, thus, need to be replicated under various masking conditions.

Stereoanomalous (SA) subjects have normal visual acuity but reduced stereopsis and may have a prevalence of up to 30%. It has been suggested that, in SA subjects, an imbalance in interocular inhibition might underlie an asymmetry in sensory eye dominance (SED). Our study expands upon previous findings by examining binocular rivalry (BR) mean dominance durations, dichoptic masking (DM) thresholds and SED for a group of SA subjects compared to naïve controls. We examined BR dominance durations and DM thresholds for 15 stereonormal (SN) subjects and 10 SA subjects with normal or corrected-to-normal visual acuity. All subjects had visual acuity of 20/40 or better and less than or equal to two lines difference between eyes. Individuals who scored ≥6/9 on the Randot stereo test and <100 arcmin on the PacMan Stereo Acuity test were considered SN. We compared near-vertical and near-horizontal oriented sine-wave gratings for BR and DM in order to dissociate stereo-related mechanisms that rely on horizontal disparities from other eye-based integration mechanisms. Mean randot scores for SN subjects were 8.5/9 with a PacMan stereoacuity of 33 arcmin, and SA subjects scored 2.5/9 and 3,380 arcmin, respectively. The mean difference in SED was 0.19 for SN and 0.48 for SA when measured with a neutral density filter bar. The SA group showed a large interocular difference in BR durations that was significantly greater than normal (p = 0.004) and correlated with loss of stereoacuity. Moreover, the interocular difference for DM was similarly greater for SA subjects (p = 0.04) although a proportional difference in monocular sensitivity could partially account for this. We also found that both SN and SA subjects presented higher DM thresholds and, to some extent, sensitivity for vertical than horizontal orientations. SA subjects show an abnormal bias toward their dominant eye for both BR and DM. These data suggest that common mechanisms of monocular sensitivity and interocular inhibition may limit multiple binocular measures and provides a practical link to better understand the heterogeneity of stereopsis in amblyopia.

Experiments using enriched environments have shown that physical exercise modulates visual plasticity in rodents. A recent study (Lunghi & Sale, 2015) investigated whether exercise also affects visual plasticity in adult humans. The plastic effect they measured was the shift in ocular dominance caused by 2 hr of monocular deprivation (e.g., by an eye patch). They used a binocular rivalry task to measure this shift. They found that the magnitude of the shift was increased by exercise during the deprivation period. This effect of exercise was later disputed by a study that used a different behavioral task (Zhou, Reynaud, & Hess, 2017). Our goal was to determine whether the difference in task was responsible for that study's failure to find an exercise effect. We set out to replicate Lunghi and Sale (2015). We measured ocular dominance with a rivalry task before and after 2 hr of deprivation. We measured data from two conditions in 30 subjects. On two separate days, they either performed exercise or rested during the deprivation period. Contrary to the previous study, we find no significant effect of exercise. We hypothesize that exercise may affect rivalry dynamics in a way that interacts with the measurement of the deprivation effect.

A few hours of monocular patching temporarily enhances the deprived eye's contribution to binocular vision, constituting a form of adult brain plasticity. Although the mechanism for this plasticity is currently unknown, several imaging studies present evidence that monocular deprivation achieves its effects by changing excitatory-inhibitory balance in the visual cortex. Much of the past work on adult monocular patching utilized binocular rivalry to quantify the patching-induced shift in perceptual eye dominance, extracting periods of exclusive visibility (in which one eye's signal is suppressed from perception) to assess each eye's contribution to binocular vision while overlooking the occurrence of mixed visibility (in which information from both eyes is combined). In this paper, we discuss two experiments to investigate the effects of short-term monocular occlusion on the relative predominance of mixed and exclusive percepts during binocular rivalry. In addition to the known perceptual eye-dominance shift, we hypothesized patching would also increase the perception of mixtures during rivalry due to deprivation-induced changes in excitatory-inhibitory balance. Our data point to two previously unknown effects of monocular deprivation: (a) a significant increase in the overall fraction and median duration of mixed visibility during rivalry that is detectable up to at least an hour after removing the patch and (b) the overall fraction of superimposition; rather than piecemeal, mixed percepts are specifically enhanced after monocular deprivation. In addition to strengthening the contribution of the deprived eye, our results show that temporary monocular patching enhances the visibility of fused binocular percepts, likely the result of attenuated interocular inhibition.

It is commonly assumed that one eye is dominant over the other eye. Eye dominance is most frequently determined by using the hole-in-the-card test. However, it is currently unclear whether eye dominance as determined by the hole-in-the-card test (so-called sighting eye dominance) generalizes to tasks involving interocular conflict (engaging sensory eye dominance). We therefore investigated whether sighting eye dominance is linked to sensory eye dominance in several frequently used paradigms that involve interocular conflict. Eye dominance was measured by the hole-in-the-card test, binocular rivalry, and breaking continuous flash suppression (b-CFS). Relationships between differences in eye dominance were assessed using Bayesian statistics. Strikingly, none of the three interocular conflict tasks yielded a difference in perceptual report between eyes when comparing the dominant eye with the nondominant eye as determined by the hole-in-the-card test. From this, we conclude that sighting eye dominance is different from sensory eye dominance. Interestingly, eye dominance of onset rivalry correlated with that of ongoing rivalry but not with that of b-CFS. Hence, we conclude that b-CFS reflects a different form of eye dominance than onset and ongoing rivalry. In sum, eye dominance seems to be a multifaceted phenomenon, which is differently expressed across interocular conflict paradigms. Finally, we highly discourage using tests measuring sighting eye dominance to determine the dominant eye in a subsequent experiment involving interocular conflict. Rather, we recommend that whenever experimental manipulations require a priori knowledge of eye dominance, eye dominance should be determined using pretrials of the same task that will be used in the main experiment.

Binocular rivalry occurs when the images presented to the two eyes do not match. Instead of fusing into a stable percept, perception during rivalry alternates between images over time. However, during rivalry, perception can also resemble a patchwork of parts of both eyes' images. Such integration of image parts across eyes is relatively rare compared to integration of image parts presented to the same eye, suggesting that integration across space during rivalry is primarily rooted at the early monocular level of processing. However, recent evidence suggests that rivalry, and potentially also integration across space during rivalry, has its basis at multiple stages of processing, including stages at which monocular signals are minimal. As such, integration and competition at these later stages would be driven more by image-based factors, such as continuity and color than by eye of origin. Because "higher" visual areas also have increasingly larger receptive fields, image-based integration may occur over a larger spatial extent compared to monocular, eye-based integration. We therefore used rival images containing two separate image parts and varied the interimage-part distance (IIPD) to assess the relative contributions of eye of origin and image features to integration across space at increasing IIPDs. Our hypothesis was that the balance between these contributions would shift toward image features as IIPD increased. Instead, results show that the relative contributions of both factors to grouping remain constant as a function of IIPD. This indicates that image-based grouping is subject to similar spatial constraints as monocular, eye-based grouping, suggesting both kinds of grouping rely on similarly sized receptive fields.

Although it is well established that there is a tight coupling between covert attention and the eye movement system there is an ongoing controversy whether this relationship is functional. Previous studies demonstrated that disrupting the ability to execute an eye movement interferes with the allocation of covert attention. One technique that prevents the execution of an eye movement involves the abduction of the eye in the orbit while presenting the stimuli outside of the effective oculomotor range (Craighero, Nascimben, & Fadiga, 2004). Although eye abduction is supposed to disrupt activation of the oculomotor program responsible for the shift of covert attention, this crucial assumption has never been tested experimentally. In the present study we used saccadic curvature to examine whether eye abduction eliminates the target-distractor competition in the oculomotor system. We experimentally reduced the ability to execute saccades by abducting the eye by 30° (monocular vision). This way the peripheral part of the temporal hemifield was located outside the oculomotor range. Participants made a vertical eye movement while on some trials a distractor was shown either inside or outside of the oculomotor range. The curvature away from distractors located outside the oculomotor range was reduced, but not completely eliminated. This confirms that eye abduction influences the activation of the oculomotor program, but points to the fact that other forms of motor planning, such as head movements are also represented in the oculomotor system. The results are in line with the idea that covert attention is an emerging property of movement planning, but is not restricted to saccade planning.

Amblyopia is a developmental disorder of vision usually associated with the presence of strabismus and/or anisometropia during early childhood. Subject literature has shown that both the amblyopic and fellow eyes (especially in strabismic subjects) may manifest a variety of perceptual and oculomotor deficits. Previous studies using simple saccadic responses (pro-saccades) showed an increased saccadic latency only for the amblyopic eye viewing conditions. So far, there have appeared no saccadic latency studies in strabismic amblyopia for more complex volitional saccades. In order to maximize the contribution of the central retina in the process of saccade initiation, we decided to use delayed saccadic responses in order to test the hypothesis about saccadic latency increase in both eyes in strabismic amblyopes. The results from our study have shown that saccadic latency is increased both in the dominant and amblyopic eyes. In addition, the amblyopic eye in the strabismic group showed greater increase in saccadic latency compared to an amblyopic eye in the anisometropic group from our previous study. The observed increase in saccadic reaction time for the dominant eye is novel and provides further evidence that the visual pathway associated with the dominant eye might be also impaired in strabismic amblyopia. Since an abnormal binocular input during visual system development may affect gaze stability in both eyes, we speculate that unsteady fixation accompanied with subtle perceptual deficits contribute to an increase in saccadic latency that is observed in the dominant eye. Moreover, it appears that the cortical processes related to saccade decisions are delayed both for amblyopic and fellow eyes in strabismic subjects.

In binocular rivalry, moving stimulus is dominant over stationary stimulus. This is called motion dominance. The motion here is usually a motion defined on the retina (retinal motion). However, motion can be defined in several different coordinates. It can be defined with respect to objects in the background (object-based motion) or to observers' head or body (spatiotopic motion), as well as to the retinal coordinate. In this study, we examined the role of motions defined by these three coordinates. A dichoptic pair of gratings was presented to create a binocular rivalry, one of which was moving and the other stationary. A fixation point and a reference background were either moving with the grating or stationary, depending on the condition. Different combinations of the three types of motions were created by having the observer track the fixation point or the background when they are moving. It was found that the retinal motion does not necessarily yield motion dominance, and that the motion dominance is determined by the combination of motions defined by different coordinate systems.

Monovision presbyopia interventions exploit the binocular nature of the visual system by independently manipulating the optical properties of the two eyes. It is unclear, however, how individual variations in ocular dominance affect visual function in monovision corrections. Here, we examined the impact of sensory ocular dominance on visual performance in both traditional and modified monovision presbyopic corrections. We recently developed a binocular adaptive optics vision simulator to correct subjects' native aberrations and induce either modified monovision (1.5 D anisometropia, spherical aberration of +0.1 and -0.4 μm in distance and near eyes, respectively, over 4 mm pupils) or traditional monovision (1.5 D anisometropia). To quantify both the sign and the degree of ocular dominance, we utilized binocular rivalry to estimate stimulus contrast ratios that yield balanced dominance durations for the two eyes. Through-focus visual acuity and contrast sensitivity were measured under two conditions: (a) assigning dominant and nondominant eye to distance and near, respectively, and (b) vice versa. The results revealed that through-focus visual acuity was unaffected by ocular dominance. Contrast sensitivity, however, was significantly improved when the dominant eye coincided with superior optical quality. We hypothesize that a potential mechanism behind this observation is an interaction between ocular dominance and binocular contrast summation, and thus, assignment of the dominant eye to distance or near may be an important factor to optimize contrast threshold performance at different object distances in both modified and traditional monovision.

Different degrees of eye dominance may need to be considered when comparing monocular and binocular performance or estimating binocular summation effects. The purpose of this study was to explore eye dominance under binocular viewing conditions and observe gradual differences in preference. Two binocular eye-dominance tests were evaluated and compared to the hole-in-the-card sighting test. The first experiment was based on a binocular sighting test. The second originated from the variable-angle mirror test, utilizing physiological diplopia to determine which eye dominates the binocular percept. The participants were 32 healthy subject with normal sight. For both experiments there were plausible effects of different degrees of eye dominance affecting how the subjects positioned or perceived the scene. The outcomes were supported by a statistically significant correlation with an interocular difference in sensitivity to degraded visibility. A statistically significant correlation was found between the hole-in-the-card test and the variable-angle mirror test (r = 0.527, p &lt; 0.01). The experiments confirm the plausible occurrence of forms of eye dominance under binocular viewing conditions. The correlation with the hole-in-the-card test was weak to moderate, due to factors that appear to be related to testing and viewing conditions. Interocular differences in sensitivity to blur appear to be a useful factor in further grading of eye dominance.

In daily life, eye movement control usually occurs in the context of concurrent action demands in other effector domains. However, little research has focused on understanding how such cross-modal action demands are coordinated, especially when conflicting information needs to be processed conjunctly in different action modalities. In two experiments, we address this issue by studying vocal responses in the context of spatially conflicting eye movements (Experiment 1) and in the context of spatially conflicting manual actions (Experiment 2, under controlled eye fixation conditions). Crucially, a comparison across experiments allows us to assess resource scheduling priorities among the three effector systems by comparing the same (vocal) response demands in the context of eye movements in contrast to manual responses. The results indicate that in situations involving response conflict, eye movements are prioritized over concurrent action demands in another effector system. This oculomotor dominance effect corroborates previous observations in the context of multiple action demands without spatial response conflict. Furthermore, and in line with recent theoretical accounts of parallel multiple action control, resource scheduling patterns appear to be flexibly adjustable based on the temporal proximity of the two actions that need to be performed., (© 2014 ARVO.)

Binocular rivalry provides a valuable means to study how sensory processing gives rise to subjective experiences because it involves a changing percept without any change in the visual stimulus. An important question, however, is whether visual awareness is necessary for binocular rivalry to emerge. To address this question, we presented conflicting random dot motion stimuli in the two eyes at luminance contrasts around perceptual threshold. We asked subjects to report continuously, via button presses, if they noticed any kind of motion in the display (be it coherent or not) and indicate which direction of motion they thought was dominant at any given instant even if they were unaware of any motion in the display. We biased the competition between the two dichoptic stimuli by changing the motion coherence in one eye while keeping it fixed in the other to test if this induced predictable changes in rivalry dynamics. We also probed the strength of the interocular suppression. Our data show that binocular rivalry continues even if subjects claim complete absence of visual motion awareness. This remarkable dissociation between visually guided behavior and visual awareness resembles the dissociation seen in other phenomena, such as blindsight and visual masking. Fluctuations in awareness that did occur were temporally linked to the dominance switches in a manner that is consistent with adaptation reciprocal-inhibition models of binocular rivalry., (© 2014 ARVO.)

The binocular advantage in reading performance is typically small. On the other hand research shows binocular reading to be remarkably robust to degraded stimulus properties. We hypothesized that this robustness may stem from an increasing binocular contribution. The main objective was to compare monocular and binocular performance at different stimulus contrasts and assess the level of binocular superiority. A secondary objective was to assess any asymmetry in performance related to ocular dominance. In a balanced repeated measures experiment 18 subjects read texts at three levels of contrast monocularly and binocularly while their eye movements were recorded. The binocular advantage increased with reduced contrast producing a 7% slower monocular reading at 40% contrast, 9% slower at 20% contrast, and 21% slower at 10% contrast. A statistically significant interaction effect was found in fixation duration displaying a more adverse effect in the monocular condition at lowest contrast. No significant effects of ocular dominance were observed. The outcome suggests that binocularity contributes increasingly to reading performance as stimulus contrast decreases. The strongest difference between monocular and binocular performance was due to fixation duration. The findings may pose a clinical point that it may be necessary to consider tests at different contrast levels when estimating reading performance., (© 2014 ARVO.)

It is generally believed that percept alternations in binocular rivalry result from the interplay between mutual inhibition and slow adaptation of the competing percepts. This view is supported by growing evidence that dynamic changes in adaptation indeed support percept alternations in binocular rivalry. Empirical evidence for the involvement of mutual inhibition, however, is still scarce. To fill this gap, we presented human subjects with dichoptic random-dot motion stimuli and manipulated the angle between the monocular directions of motion from pure opponent horizontal motion to pure vertical motion in the same direction. We hypothesized that this decrease in motion-direction disparity increases the cross-inhibition gain due to lateral inhibition between neurons in the brain that are coarsely tuned to adjacent directions of visual motion, which predicts the largest changes in dominance at the smallest instead of the largest motion-direction disparities. We found that decreasing the angle between the two monocular directions of motion indeed systematically increased the predominance and mean dominance durations of the motion pattern presented to the ocular dominant eye (as identified by the hole-in-card test). Moreover, this effect was stronger if the contrast of the stimuli was lowered. Simulations showed that these features are indeed hallmark of weighted lateral inhibition between populations of directionally tuned motion-sensitive neurons. Our findings thus suggest dominance and suppression in binocular rivalry arises naturally from this fundamental principle in sensory processing. Interestingly, if the two monocular directions of motion differed <60°, the percept alternations also included transitions to in-between (vertical) motion percepts. We speculate that this behavior might result from positive feedback arising from adapting disinhibitory circuits in the network.

During development, within a specific temporal window called the critical period, the mammalian visual cortex is highly plastic and literally shaped by visual experience; to what extent this extraordinary plasticity is retained in the adult brain is still a debated issue. We tested the residual plastic potential of the adult visual cortex for both achromatic and chromatic vision by measuring binocular rivalry in adult humans following 150 minutes of monocular patching. Paradoxically, monocular deprivation resulted in lengthening of the mean phase duration of both luminance-modulated and equiluminant stimuli for the deprived eye and complementary shortening of nondeprived phase durations, suggesting an initial homeostatic compensation for the lack of information following monocular deprivation. When equiluminant gratings were tested, the effect was measurable for at least 180 minutes after reexposure to binocular vision, compared with 90 minutes for achromatic gratings. Our results suggest that chromatic vision shows a high degree of plasticity, retaining the effect for a duration (180 minutes) longer than that of the deprivation period (150 minutes) and twice as long as that found with achromatic gratings. The results are in line with evidence showing a higher vulnerability of the P pathway to the effects of visual deprivation during development and a slower development of chromatic vision in humans.

Binocularity is a fundamental property of primate vision. Ocular dominance describes the perceptual weight given to the inputs from the two eyes in their binocular combination. There is a distribution of sensory dominance within the normal binocular population with most subjects having balanced inputs while some are dominated by the left eye and some by the right eye. Using short-term monocular deprivation, the sensory dominance can be modulated as, under these conditions, the patched eye's contribution is strengthened. We address two questions: Is this strengthening a general effect such that it is seen for different types of sensory processing? And is the strengthening specific to pattern deprivation, or does it also occur for light deprivation? Our results show that the strengthening effect is a general finding involving a number of sensory functions, and it occurs as a result of both pattern and light deprivation.

Pre-exposure to a stimulus can modulate initial perceptual dominance experienced in binocular rivalry with brief test stimuli (onset rivalry). This study investigated this modulating effect using both color and pattern stimuli. We confirmed separate contributions of eye- and feature-based suppressions and showed that their relative strength varied with temporal parameters. Eye-based suppression was stronger with a short test duration (10 ms) and shorter ISIs between the preceding and test stimuli. On the other hand, feature-based suppression grew with ISI and was more pronounced with a longer test duration (200 ms). We also investigated the nature of the modulating effect associated with feature-based suppression using chromatic gratings of high luminance contrast. Results revealed that different features of the preceding stimulus (i.e., color and orientation) exerted nearly independent effects on onset rivalry. However, different features shared their fate in competitive interactions for perceptual dominance; when one feature became dominant, the other also dominated. These findings suggest that competitive interactions for perceptual dominance and the modulation of these interactions are mediated at least partially by different mechanisms. Overall, the present findings are consistent with a theoretical view that initial dominance is established through competitive interactions at multiple levels of processing.

Neural adaptation plays an important role in multistable perception, but its effects are difficult to discern in sequences of perceptual reversals. Investigating the multistable appearance of kinetic depth and binocular rivalry displays, we introduce cumulative history as a novel statistical measure of adaptive state. We show that cumulative history-an integral of past perceptual states, weighted toward the most recent states-significantly and consistently correlates with future dominance durations: the larger the cumulative history measure, the shorter are future dominance times, revealing a robust effect of neural adaptation. The characteristic time scale of cumulative history, which may be computed by Monte Carlo methods, correlates with average dominance durations, as expected for a measure of neural adaptation. When the cumulative histories of two competing percepts are balanced, perceptual reversals take longer and their outcome becomes random, demonstrating that perceptual reversals are fluctuation-driven in the absence of adaptational bias. Our findings quantify the role of neural adaptation in multistable perception, which accounts for approximately 10% of the variability of reversal timing.

During binocular rivalry, perception alternates between dissimilar images that are presented dichoptically. It has been argued that perception during the dominance phase of rivalry is unaffected by the suppressed image. Recent evidence suggests, however, that the suppressed image does affect perception of the dominant image, yet the extent and nature of this interaction remain elusive. We hypothesize that this interaction depends on the difference in feature content between the rivaling images. Here, we investigate how sensitivity to probes presented in the image that is currently dominant in perception is affected by the suppressed image. Observers performed a 2AFC discrimination task on oriented probes (Experiment 1) or probes with different motion directions (Experiment 2). Our results show that performance on both orientation and motion direction discrimination was affected by the content of the suppressed image. The strength of interference depended specifically on the difference in feature content (e.g., the difference in orientation) between the probe and the suppressed image. Moreover, the pattern of interference by the suppressed image is qualitatively similar to the situation where this image and the probe are simultaneously visible. We conclude that perception during the dominance phase of rivalry is affected by a suppressed image as if it were visible.

Short daily periods of binocular exposure (BE) can offset longer single daily episodes of monocular exposure (ME) to prevent the development of deprivation amblyopia. To determine whether the outcome depended upon an absolute daily amount of BE or its proportion of the daily visual exposure, daily mixed visual input of 3 different durations (3.5, 7, or 12 h) was imposed on 3 cohorts of kittens. Measurements of the visual acuity of the deprived eye at the end of mixed daily visual input revealed that the acuity of the deprived eye developed to normal values so long as the proportion of the total exposure that was binocular was 30% or more. By contrast, the development of functional ocular dominance domains in V1 revealed by optical imaging suggests that normal domains emerge with a fixed amount of daily binocular exposure. The latter result is consistent with the effects of any daily period of ME, or BE, or both, effectively saturating with a small dose so that the effects of ME of any length can be offset by a short period of BE. The different result for vision may reflect neural events at higher and/or multiple levels in the visual pathway.

When the two eyes view incompatible images that subtend the entire visual field, perception alternates between the two images unpredictably: at seemingly random times and locations, observers experience sudden changes in the awareness of the unchanging visual stimulation. Here we focus on the very first spontaneous breakout from the very first suppression phase after onset of the two eyes' competing whole-field stimuli. We call such spontaneous local breakout an "initial percept-switch nucleation." We employed homogeneous visual input to examine where, and how, spontaneous local initial percept-switch nucleations originate, demonstrating that their spatial distribution contains locally random inhomogeneities, which are eye- and observer-dependent. We were able to predict the occurrence probability of the percept nucleations by adaptation buildup of the neurons associated with the representation of one eye's image. Intriguingly, the neuronal processes related to both cross-inhibition and local eye dominance could not predict nucleation probability; this is because nucleation inhomogeneity appeared to be different from another previously reported local inhomogeneity known as "onset bias" signifying the local first dominance-choice inhomogeneity upon stimulus onset. Collectively, we reveal a governing role of local adaptation in the neurons associated with early visual processing of one eye's image, in the origination of new phases in awareness.

In binocular rivalry, the visual percept alternates stochastically between two dichoptically presented stimuli. It is established that both processes related to the eye of origin and binocular, stimulus-related processes account for these fluctuations in conscious perception. Here we studied how their relative contributions vary over time. We applied brief disruptions to rivalry displays, concurrent with an optional eye swap, at varying time intervals after one stimulus became visible (dominant). We found that early in a dominance phase the dominant eye determined the percept by stabilizing its own contribution (regardless of the stimulus), with an additional yet weaker stabilizing contribution of the stimulus (regardless of the eye). Their stabilizing contributions declined in parallel with time so that late in a dominance phase the stimulus (and in some cases also the eye-based) contribution turned negative, favoring a perceptual (or ocular) switch. Our findings show that depending on the time, first processes related to the eye of origin and then those related to the stimulus can have a greater net influence on the stability of the conscious percept. Their co-varying change may be due to feedback from image- to eye-of-origin representations.

When an ambiguous stimulus is viewed for a prolonged time, perception alternates between the different possible interpretations of the stimulus. The alternations seem haphazard, but closer inspection of their dynamics reveals systematic properties in many bistable phenomena. Parametric manipulations result in gradual changes in the fraction of time a given interpretation dominates perception, often over the entire possible range of zero to one. The mean dominance durations of the competing interpretations can also vary over wide ranges (from less than a second to dozens of seconds or more), but finding systematic relations in how they vary has proven difficult. Following the pioneering work of W. J. M. Levelt (1968) in binocular rivalry, previous studies have sought to formulate a relation in terms of the effect of physical parameters of the stimulus, such as image contrast in binocular rivalry. However, the link between external parameters and "stimulus strength" is not as obvious for other bistable phenomena. Here we show that systematic relations readily emerge when the mean dominance durations are examined instead as a function of "percept strength," as measured by the fraction of dominance time, and provide theoretical rationale for this observation. For three different bistable phenomena, plotting the mean dominance durations of the two percepts against the fraction of dominance time resulted in complementary curves with near-perfect symmetry around equi-dominance (the point where each percept dominates half the time). As a consequence, the alternation rate reaches a maximum at equi-dominance. We next show that the observed behavior arises naturally in simple double-well energy models and in neural competition models with cross-inhibition and input normalization. Finally, we discuss the possibility that bistable perceptual switches reflect a perceptual "exploratory" strategy, akin to foraging behavior, which leads naturally to maximal alternation rate at equi-dominance if perceptual switches come with a cost.

When the two eyes are presented with dissimilar images, human observers report alternating percepts-a phenomenon coined binocular rivalry. These perceptual fluctuations reflect competition between the two visual inputs both at monocular and binocular processing stages. Here we investigated the influence of auditory stimulation on the temporal dynamics of binocular rivalry. In three psychophysics experiments, we investigated whether sounds that provide directionally congruent, incongruent, or non-motion information modulate the dominance periods of rivaling visual motion percepts. Visual stimuli were dichoptically presented random-dot kinematograms (RDKs) at different levels of motion coherence. The results show that directional motion sounds rather than auditory input per se influenced the temporal dynamics of binocular rivalry. In all experiments, motion sounds prolonged the dominance periods of the directionally congruent visual motion percept. In contrast, motion sounds abbreviated the suppression periods of the directionally congruent visual motion percepts only when they competed with directionally incongruent percepts. Therefore, analogous to visual contextual effects, auditory motion interacted primarily with consciously perceived visual input rather than visual input suppressed from awareness. Our findings suggest that auditory modulation of perceptual dominance times might be established in a top-down fashion by means of feedback mechanisms.

When different images are presented to the two eyes, each can intermittently disappear, leaving the other to dominate perception. This is called binocular rivalry. When using radial gratings, focal contrast increments can trigger a traveling wave of perceptual dominance change, originating at the locus of the contrast increment and circling the stimulus. This has been linked to a sweep of activity through V1 that can be traced via fMRI. The dominance of more complex images, like human faces, has been linked to higher level processing structures characterized by more holistic object centered properties. We therefore decided to assess how dominance would spread through more complex images. Using Kanisza squares and human faces we found that dominance tended to spread gradually away from the locus of the contrast increment, often along real or illusory contours. We also found that perceptual dominance was slow to spread between facial regions encoded by different monocular channels. These data are consistent with low-level monocular mechanisms, like those found in V1, playing a determinant role in the spread of perceptual dominance through complex images during binocular rivalry.

Binocular eye movements of normal adult readers were examined as they read single sentences. Analyses of horizontal and vertical fixation disparities indicated that the most prevalent type of disparate fixation is crossed (i.e., the left eye is located further to the right than the right eye) while the left eye frequently fixates somewhat above the right eye. The Gaussian distribution of the binocular fixation point peaked 2.6 cm in front of the plane of text, reflecting the prevalence of horizontally crossed fixations. Fixation disparity accumulates during the course of successive saccades and fixations within a line of text, but only to an extent that does not compromise single binocular vision. In reading, the version and vergence system interact in a way that is qualitatively similar to what has been observed in simple nonreading tasks. Finally, results presented here render it unlikely that vergence movements in reading aim at realigning the eyes at a given saccade target word.

This paper describes a novel psychophysical and analytical technique, called periodic perturbation, for creating and characterizing perceptual waves associated with transitions in visibility of a stimulus during binocular rivalry and during binocular fusion. Observers tracked rivalry within a small, central region of spatially extended rival targets while small, brief increments in contrast ("triggers") were presented repetitively in antiphase within different regions of the two rival targets. Appropriately timed triggers produced entrainment of rivalry alternations within the central region, with the optimal timing dependent on an observer's native alternation rate. The latency between trigger and state switch increased with the distance between the location of the trigger and the central region being monitored, providing evidence for traveling waves of dominance. Traveling waves produced by periodic perturbation exhibited the same characteristics as those generated using a less efficient, more demanding discrete trial technique. We used periodic perturbation to reveal a novel relation between the dynamics associated with the spontaneous perceptual alternations and the speed of traveling waves across observers. In addition, we found evidence for traveling waves even when the events triggering them were initiated within regions of the visual field where binocular vision was stable, in the absence of binocular rivalry, implying that perceptual organization generally depends on spatio-temporal context.

When the two eyes are presented with conflicting stimuli, perception starts to fluctuate over time (i.e., binocular rivalry). A similar fluctuation occurs when two patterns are presented to a single eye (i.e., monocular rivalry), or when they are swapped rapidly and repeatedly between the eyes (i.e., stimulus rivalry). Although all these cases lead to rivalry, in quantitative terms these modes of rivalry are generally found to differ significantly. We studied these different modes of rivalry with identical intermittently shown stimuli while varying the temporal layout of stimulation. We show that the quantitative differences between the modes of rivalry are caused by the presence of monocular interactions between the rivaling patterns; the introduction of a blank period just before a stimulus swap changed the number of rivalry reports to the extent that monocular and stimulus rivalries were inducible over ranges of spatial frequency content and contrast values that were nearly identical to binocular rivalry. Moreover when monocular interactions did not occur the perceptual dynamics of monocular, binocular, and stimulus rivalries were statistically indistinguishable. This range of identical behavior exhibited a monocular (approximately 50 ms) and a binocular (approximately 350 ms) limit. We argue that a common binocular, or pattern-based, mechanism determines the temporal constraints for these modes of rivalry.

Although a number of low-level visual deficits in amblyopia have been identified, it is still unclear to what extent these deficits extend throughout the visual processing hierarchy. Biological motion perception can be a useful measure of local and global visual processing since the point-light stimuli that are often used to study this ability carry both local motion and global form information. To investigate the integrity of the biological motion processing system in amblyopia, we employed both detection and discrimination tasks with coherent or scrambled point-light walkers either alone or embedded in different types of point-light masks. These manipulations allowed for control over the amount of form and/or motion information available to the observers that could be used for task performance. We found that amblyopic eyes could process both the global form and local motion components of point-light walkers, indicating intact processing for these stimuli. However, amblyopic eyes did show an increased susceptibility to the addition of masking dots suggesting that segregation of signal from noise is deficient in amblyopia.

We show that previewing one half image of a binocular rivalry pair can cause it to gain initial dominance when the other half is added, a novel phenomenon we term flash facilitation. This is the converse of a known effect called flash suppression, where the previewed image becomes suppressed upon rivalrous presentation. The exact effect of previewing an image depends on both the duration and the contrast of the prior stimulus. Brief, low-contrast prior stimuli facilitate, whereas long, high-contrast ones suppress. These effects have both an eye-based component and a pattern-based component. Our results suggest that, instead of reflecting two unrelated mechanisms, both facilitation and suppression are manifestations of a single process that occurs progressively during presentation of the prior stimulus. The distinction between the two phenomena would then lie in the extent to which the process has developed during prior stimulation. This view is consistent with a neural model previously proposed to account for perceptual stabilization of ambiguous stimuli, suggesting a relation between perceptual stabilization and the present phenomena.

One extensively investigated form of perceptual bistability is binocular rivalry--When dissimilar patterns are presented one to each eye, these patterns compete for perceptual dominance. Here, we report that transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over early visual areas induces alternations during binocular rivalry. The effect of TMS on binocular rivalry was retinotopic, suggesting that rivalry mechanisms are localized in the cortical representation of visual space. The timing of perturbations was highly dependent on individual differences in rivalry alternation frequencies, with more delayed effects found in slower alternators. This finding suggests that both binocular rivalry and TMS dynamics might be contingent on individual differences among observers. We performed an analogous set of experiments by replacing TMS with transient visual stimulation. The results, however, qualitatively and quantitatively differed from those reported with TMS. Finally, we found that TMS over early visual areas does not produce any time-locked effects on another dynamical process--eye-swapping stimulus rivalry. These findings constitute the first causative evidence that binocular rivalry is contingent on neural activity in early visual areas and suggest that binocular rivalry and stimulus rivalry have different neural correlates, supporting multilevel theories of visual rivalry.

When our two eyes view incongruent images, we experience binocular rivalry: An ongoing cycle of dominance periods of either image and transition periods when both are visible. Two key forces underlying this process are adaptation of and inhibition between the images' neural representations. Models based on these factors meet the constraints posed by data on dominance periods, but these are not very stringent. We extensively studied contrast dependence of dominance and transition durations and that of the occurrence of return transitions: Occasions when an eye loses and regains dominance without intervening dominance of the other eye. We found that dominance durations and the incidence of return transitions depend similarly on contrast; transition durations show a different dependence. Regarding dominance durations, we show that the widely accepted rule known as Levelt's second proposition is only valid in a limited contrast range; outside this range, the opposite of the proposition is true. Our data refute current models, based solely on adaptation and inhibition, as these cannot explain the long and reversible transitions that we find. These features indicate that noise is a crucial force in rivalry, frequently dominating the deterministic forces.

We investigated the effects of attention on dominance durations during binocular rivalry. In a series of three experiments, observers performed several tasks while viewing rival stimuli to ensure and control deployment of attention. We found that endogenous attention can prolong dominance durations of attended stimulus. We developed a novel single-task procedure where observer's responses in an attentional task were used to objectively estimate dominance durations of the attended stimulus. Using this procedure, we showed that paying attention to the stimulus features involved in rivalry is necessary for prolonging dominance durations--mere engagement of attention during rivalry was insufficient. Finally, we were able to simulate the effects of endogenous attention by doubling the contrast of the attended stimulus while it was dominant. Attention may increase the apparent contrast of the attended stimulus, thereby prolonging its dominance duration. Overall, our results indicate that dominance durations in rivalry can be prolonged when observers are performing an attentionally demanding task on the rival stimulus.

Bistable perception is fundamentally a dynamic process: Our perceptual experience continuously alternates when an ambiguous or rivalrous stimulus is observed. Here we present a method to analyze instantaneous measures of dominance and transition between percepts. The analysis extracts three time-varying probabilities. First, the transient preference represents the probability of perceiving one interpretation at one instant. Second, the reversal probability is the probability that the current percept will change at the next evaluation. Finally, the survival probabilities are the probability that at one instant the current percept will not switch to the alternative interpretation. We derive the relationships between these probabilities and offer a test of independence between consecutive percepts. We also introduce a simple technique to sample the observer's perception at regular intervals. The analyzing method is illustrated with the example of binocular rivalry. We demonstrate Levelt's second proposition with the survival probability measure and show that the consecutive rivalrous percepts are not independent.

Studying the temporal dynamics of bistable perception can be useful for understanding neural mechanisms underlying the phenomenon. We take a closer look at those temporal dynamics, using data from four different ambiguous stimuli. We focus our analyses on two recurrent themes in bistable perception literature. First, we address the question whether percept durations follow a gamma distribution, as is commonly assumed. We conclude that this assumption is not justified by the gamma distribution's approximate resemblance to distributions of percept durations. We instead present two straightforward distributions of reciprocal percept durations (i.e., rates) that both easily surpass the classic gamma distribution in terms of resemblance to empirical data. Second, we compare the distributions arising from binocular rivalry with those from other forms of bistable perception. Parallels in temporal dynamics between those classes of stimuli are often mentioned as an indication of a similar neural basis, but have never been studied in detail. Our results demonstrate that the distributions arising from binocular rivalry and other forms of bistable perception are indeed similar up to a high level of detail.

Extended contours are a common feature of natural images. Most previous studies have considered contour integration as a two-dimensional process of linking like-oriented elements along their common orientation axis. Yet contours exist in a three-dimensional world, and one might therefore ask about the relationship between contour integration and binocular vision. Using an event-related potential assay of contour integration, we demonstrate that patients with strabismic amblyopia show a relative insensitivity to Gabor-defined contours in their dominant eyes, all of which had normal acuity. These deficits were not seen in the dominant eyes of patients with anisometropic amblyopia without strabismus, but were present in the amblyopic eyes of patients with either strabismus or anisometropia. Deficits were also found in both eyes of strabismus patients who had normal visual acuity in each eye, but who had strongly reduced or absent stereopsis. These results suggest that the maturation of contour detection mechanisms depends at least in part on the presence of normal binocular interaction during a developmental critical period.

The inability of the human visual system to fuse dissimilar patterns in corresponding regions of the two eyes results in stochastic alternation of perceptual dominance between the two patterns: rivalry. When rivalrous stimuli are presented intermittently their perception is stabilized (Leopold, Wilke, Maier, & Logothetis, 2002). This stability indicates the operation of some kind of perceptual memory across interruptions in stimulation. Here we examined the contents of this perceptual memory to quantify the relative contributions of different sources of information: eye-of-origin, orientation, and color. Stimuli were intermittently presented and, during each blank interruption, we swapped either the color, orientation, or eye of presentation of the gratings. Comparing the percepts reported before and after each interruption allowed us to establish what aspects of perception remained stable. During conventional binocular rivalry, the eye in which the stimulus was presented remained stable across 74% of interruptions. Stimulus color and orientation also had weaker significant effects. When eye-of-origin information was eliminated by alternating the patterns rapidly between the two eyes, stimulus color remained stable across 86% of interruptions. Stimulus orientation again had a weaker but significant effect. These results demonstrate that the mechanisms mediating perceptual stability across interruptions in rivalry can operate at both monocular and binocular levels, much like the mechanisms operating during continuous viewing of rivalrous stimuli. On the basis of this similarity, we speculate that perceptual memory across interruptions in rivalry may involve the same neural representations as visual competition during rivalry. If this is the case, the use of intermittent stimulation in rivalry might permit the investigation of aspects of the mechanisms underlying visual competition that remain hidden during continuous presentation.