The spatial origin of a perceptual transition in binocular rivalry

When the left and the right eye are simultaneously presented with incompatible images at overlapping retinal locations, an observer typically reports perceiving only one of the two images at a time. This phenomenon is called binocular rivalry. Perception during binocular rivalry is not stable; one of the images is perceptually dominant for a certain duration (typically in the order of a few seconds) after which perception switches towards the other image. This alternation between perceptual dominance and suppression will continue for as long the images are presented. A characteristic of binocular rivalry is that a perceptual transition from one image to the other generally occurs in a gradual manner: the image that was temporarily suppressed will regain perceptual dominance at isolated locations within the perceived image, after which its visibility spreads throughout the whole image. These gradual transitions from perceptual suppression to perceptual dominance have been labeled as traveling waves of perceptual dominance. In this study we investigate whether stimulus parameters affect the location at which a traveling wave starts. We varied the contrast, spatial frequency or motion speed in one of the rivaling images, while keeping the same parameter constant in the other image. We used a flash-suppression paradigm to force one of the rival images into perceptual suppression. Observers waited until the suppressed image became perceptually dominant again, and indicated the position at which this breakthrough from suppression occurred. Our results show that the starting point of a traveling wave during binocular rivalry is highly dependent on local stimulus parameters. More specifically, a traveling wave most likely started at the location where the contrast of the suppressed image was higher than that of the dominant one, the spatial frequency of the suppressed image was lower than that of the dominant one, and the motion speed of the suppressed image was higher than that of the dominant one. We suggest that a breakthrough from suppression to dominance occurs at the location where salience (the degree to which a stimulus element stands out relative to neighboring elements) of the suppressed image is higher than that of the dominant one. Our results further show that stimulus parameters affecting the temporal dynamics during continuous viewing of rival images described in other studies, also affect the spatial origin of traveling waves during binocular rivalry.     

Ensemble cortical responses to rival visual stimuli: Effect of monocular transient

Binocular rivalry is a fascinating perceptual phenomenon that has been characterized extensively at the psychophysical level. However, the underlying neural mechanism remains poorly understood. In particular, the role of the early visual pathway remains controversial. In this study, we used voltage-sensitive dye imaging to measure the spatiotemporal activity patterns in cat area 18 evoked by dichoptic orthogonal grating stimuli. We found that after several seconds of monocular stimulation with an oriented grating, an orthogonal stimulus to the other eye evoked a reversal of the cortical response pattern, which may contribute to flash suppression in perception. Furthermore, after several seconds of rival binocular stimulation with unequal contrasts, transient increase in the contrast of the weak stimulus evoked a long-lasting cortical response. This transient-triggered response could contribute to the perceptual switch during binocular rivalry. Together, these results point to a significant contribution of early visual cortex to transient-triggered switch in perceptual dominance.     

Influence of Contrast and Coherence on the Temporal Dynamics of Binocular Motion Rivalry

Levelt’s four propositions (L1–L4), which characterize the relation between changes in “stimulus strength” in the two eyes and percept alternations, are considered benchmark for binocular rivalry models. It was recently demonstrated that adaptation mutual-inhibition models of binocular rivalry capture L4 only in a limited range of input strengths, predicting an increase rather than a decrease in dominance durations with increasing stimulus strength for weak stimuli. This observation challenges the validity of those models, but possibly L4 itself is invalid. So far, L1–L4 have been tested mainly by varying the contrast of static stimuli, but since binocular rivalry breaks down at low contrasts, it has been difficult to study L4. To circumvent this problem, and to test if the recent revision of L2 has more general validity, we studied changes in binocular rivalry evoked by manipulating coherence of oppositely-moving random-dot stimuli in the two eyes, and compared them against the effects of stimulus contrast. Thirteen human observers participated. Both contrast and coherence manipulations in one eye produced robust changes in both eyes; dominance durations of the eye receiving the stronger stimulus increased while those of the other eye decreased, albeit less steeply. This is inconsistent with L2 but supports its revision. When coherence was augmented in both eyes simultaneously, dominance durations first increased at low coherence, and then decreased for further increases in coherence. The same held true for the alternation periods. The initial increase in dominance durations was absent in the contrast experiments, but with coherence manipulations, rivalry could be tested at much lower stimulus strengths. Thus, we found that L4, like L2, is only valid in a limited range of stimulus strengths. Outside that range, the opposite is true. Apparent discrepancies between contrast and coherence experiments could be fully reconciled with adaptation mutual-inhibition models using a simple input transfer-function.     

Advantage of hole stimulus in rivalry competition

Mounting psychophysical evidence suggests that early visual computations are sensitive to the topological properties of stimuli, such as the determination of whether the object has a hole or not. Previous studies have demonstrated that the hole feature took some advantages during conscious perception. In this study, we investigate whether there exists a privileged processing for hole stimuli during unconscious perception. By applying a continuous flash suppression paradigm, the target was gradually introduced to one eye to compete against a flashed full contrast Mondrian pattern which was presented to the other eye. This method ensured that the target image was suppressed during the initial perceptual period. We compared the initial suppressed duration between the stimuli with and without the hole feature and found that hole stimuli required less time than no-hole stimuli to gain dominance against the identical suppression noise. These results suggest the hole feature could be processed in the absence of awareness, and there exists a privileged detection of hole stimuli during suppressed phase in the interocular rivalry.     

Perceptual grouping of biological motion promotes binocular rivalry

Investigation of perceptual rivalry between conflicting stimuli presented one to each eye can further understanding of the neural underpinnings of conscious visual perception. During rivalry, visual awareness fluctuates between perceptions of the two stimuli. Here, we demonstrate that high-level perceptual grouping can promote rivalry between stimulus pairs that would otherwise be perceived as nonrivalrous. Perceptual grouping was generated with point-light walker stimuli that simulate human motion, visible only as lights placed on the joints. Although such walking figures are unrecognizable when stationary, recognition judgments as complex as gender and identity can accurately be made from animated displays, demonstrating the efficiency with which our visual system can group dynamic local signals into a globally coherent walking figure. We find that point-light walker stimuli presented one to each eye and in different colors and configurations results in strong rivalry. However, rivalry is minimal when the two walkers are split between the eyes or both presented to one eye. This pattern of results suggests that processing animated walker figures promotes rivalry between signals from the two eyes rather than between higher-level representations of the walkers. This leads us to hypothesize that awareness during binocular rivalry involves the integrated activity of high-level perceptual mechanisms in conjunction with lower-level ocular suppression modulated via cortical feedback.     

Predicting Visual Consciousness Electrophysiologically from Intermittent Binocular Rivalry

Purpose

We sought brain activity that predicts visual consciousness.

Methods

We used electroencephalography (EEG) to measure brain activity to a 1000-ms display of sine-wave gratings, oriented vertically in one eye and horizontally in the other. This display yields binocular rivalry: irregular alternations in visual consciousness between the images viewed by the eyes. We replaced both gratings with 200 ms of darkness, the gap, before showing a second display of the same rival gratings for another 1000 ms. We followed this by a 1000-ms mask then a 2000-ms inter-trial interval (ITI). Eleven participants pressed keys after the second display in numerous trials to say whether the orientation of the visible grating changed from before to after the gap or not. Each participant also responded to numerous non-rivalry trials in which the gratings had identical orientations for the two eyes and for which the orientation of both either changed physically after the gap or did not.

Results

We found that greater activity from lateral occipital-parietal-temporal areas about 180 ms after initial onset of rival stimuli predicted a change in visual consciousness more than 1000 ms later, on re-presentation of the rival stimuli. We also found that less activity from parietal, central, and frontal electrodes about 400 ms after initial onset of rival stimuli predicted a change in visual consciousness about 800 ms later, on re-presentation of the rival stimuli. There was no such predictive activity when the change in visual consciousness occurred because the stimuli changed physically.

Conclusion

We found early EEG activity that predicted later visual consciousness. Predictive activity 180 ms after onset of the first display may reflect adaption of the neurons mediating visual consciousness in our displays. Predictive activity 400 ms after onset of the first display may reflect a less-reliable brain state mediating visual consciousness.     

Color and luminance influence, but can not explain, binocular rivalry onset bias

When an observer is presented with dissimilar images to the right and left eye, the images will alternate every few seconds in a phenomenon known as binocular rivalry. During sustained viewing, the timing of these switches appears to be unpredictable. Recent research has suggested that the initial 'onset' period of rivalry is not random and may be different in its neural mechanism than subsequent dominance periods. It is known that differences in luminance and contrast have a significant influence on the average dominance during sustained rivalry and that perception of luminance can vary between individuals and across the visual field. We therefore investigated whether perception of luminance contrast plays a role in onset rivalry. Observers viewed rival targets of equal brightness for brief presentations in eight locations of the near periphery and reported the color that was first dominant in each location. Results show that minimizing differences in brightness and contrast yields a stronger pattern of onset dominance bias and reveals evidence of monocular dominance. The results suggest that both contrast and monocular dominance play a role in onset dominance, though neither can fully explain the effect.     

How to Create and Use Binocular Rivalry

Each of our eyes normally sees a slightly different image of the world around us. The brain can combine these two images into a single coherent representation. However, when the eyes are presented with images that are sufficiently different from each other, an interesting thing happens: Rather than fusing the two images into a combined conscious percept, what transpires is a pattern of perceptual alternations where one image dominates awareness while the other is suppressed; dominance alternates between the two images, typically every few seconds. This perceptual phenomenon is known as binocular rivalry. Binocular rivalry is considered useful for studying perceptual selection and awareness in both human and animal models, because unchanging visual input to each eye leads to alternations in visual awareness and perception. To create a binocular rivalry stimulus, all that is necessary is to present each eye with a different image at the same perceived location. There are several ways of doing this, but newcomers to the field are often unsure which method would best suit their specific needs. The purpose of this article is to describe a number of inexpensive and straightforward ways to create and use binocular rivalry. We detail methods that do not require expensive specialized equipment and describe each method''s advantages and disadvantages. The methods described include the use of red-blue goggles, mirror stereoscopes and prism goggles.     

Duality in Binocular Rivalry: Distinct Sensitivity of Percept Sequence and Percept Duration to Imbalance between Monocular Stimuli

Background

Visual perception is usually stable and accurate. However, when the two eyes are simultaneously presented with conflicting stimuli, perception falls into a sequence of spontaneous alternations, switching between one stimulus and the other every few seconds. Known as binocular rivalry, this visual illusion decouples subjective experience from physical stimulation and provides a unique opportunity to study the neural correlates of consciousness. The temporal properties of this alternating perception have been intensively investigated for decades, yet the relationship between two fundamental properties - the sequence of percepts and the duration of each percept - remains largely unexplored.

Methodology/Principal Findings

Here we examine the relationship between the percept sequence and the percept duration by quantifying their sensitivity to the strength imbalance between two monocular stimuli. We found that the percept sequence is far more susceptible to the stimulus imbalance than does the percept duration. The percept sequence always begins with the stronger stimulus, even when the stimulus imbalance is too weak to cause a significant bias in the percept duration. Therefore, introducing a small stimulus imbalance affects the percept sequence, whereas increasing the imbalance affects the percept duration, but not vice versa. To investigate why the percept sequence is so vulnerable to the stimulus imbalance, we further measured the interval between the stimulus onset and the first percept, during which subjects experienced the fusion of two monocular stimuli. We found that this interval is dramatically shortened with increased stimulus imbalance.

Conclusions/Significance

Our study shows that in binocular rivalry, the strength imblanace between monocular stimuli has a much greater impact on the percept sequence than on the percept duration, and increasing this imbalance can accelerate the process responsible for the percept sequence.     

A Model of Binocular Rivalry and Cross-orientation Suppression

Binocular rivalry and cross-orientation suppression are well-studied forms of competition in visual cortex, but models of these two types of competition are in tension with one another. Binocular rivalry occurs during the presentation of dichoptic grating stimuli, where two orthogonal gratings presented separately to the two eyes evoke strong alternations in perceptual dominance. Cross-orientation suppression occurs during the presentation of plaid stimuli, where the responses to a component grating presented to both eyes is weakened by the presence of a superimposed orthogonal grating. Conventional models of rivalry that rely on strong competition between orientation-selective neurons incorrectly predict rivalry between the components of plaids. Lowering the inhibitory weights in such models reduces rivalry for plaids, but also reduces it for dichoptic gratings. Using an exhaustive grid search, we show that this problem cannot be solved simply by adjusting the parameters of the model. Instead, we propose a robust class of models that rely on ocular opponency neurons, previously proposed as a mechanism for efficient stereo coding, to yield rivalry only for dichoptic gratings, not for plaids. This class of models reconciles models of binocular rivalry with the divisive normalization framework that has been used to explain cross-orientation. Our model makes novel predictions that we confirmed with psychophysical tests.     

Binocular onset rivalry at the time of saccades and stimulus jumps

Recent studies suggest that binocular rivalry at stimulus onset, so called onset rivalry, differs from rivalry during sustained viewing. These observations raise the interesting question whether there is a relation between onset rivalry and rivalry in the presence of eye movements. We therefore studied binocular rivalry when stimuli jumped from one visual hemifield to the other, either through a saccade or through a passive stimulus displacement, and we compared rivalry after such displacements with onset and sustained rivalry. We presented opponent motion, orthogonal gratings and face/house stimuli through a stereoscope. For all three stimulus types we found that subjects showed a strong preference for stimuli in one eye or one hemifield (Experiment 1), and that these subject-specific biases did not persist during sustained viewing (Experiment 2). These results confirm and extend previous findings obtained with gratings. The results from the main experiment (Experiment 3) showed that after a passive stimulus jump, switching probability was low when the preferred eye was dominant before a stimulus jump, but when the non-preferred eye was dominant beforehand, switching probability was comparatively high. The results thus showed that dominance after a stimulus jump was tightly related to eye dominance at stimulus onset. In the saccade condition, however, these subject-specific biases were systematically reduced, indicating that the influence of saccades can be understood from a systematic attenuation of the subjects' onset rivalry biases. Taken together, our findings demonstrate a relation between onset rivalry and rivalry after retinal shifts and involvement of extra-retinal signals in binocular rivalry.     

A fresh look at the temporal dynamics of binocular rivalry

Human observers viewed dichoptic orthogonal sine-wave gratings and indicated when exclusive visibility occurred in either eye. Contrast was held constant in one eye and was increased or decreased in the other eye for a number of alternation cycles (continuous presentation) or for only the duration of a single period of exclusive visibility (synchronous presentation). The synchronous presentation condition allowed us to identify the differing effects of contrast during the suppressed and during the dominant periods. Mixed phases were recorded as distinct from suppressed and dominant phases, and new classifications of compound-dominant and compound-suppressed phases are defined. The results indicate that binocular rivalry responds to stimulus contrast in two ways. 1) The duty-cycle of dominance and suppression is determined by the relative image contrast between the two eyes, with dominance of the higher contrast image being favored, and 2) the overall rate of alternation is driven by monocular image contrast during the suppressed phase (increased monocular contrast increases the alternation rate) and to a lesser extent by monocular contrast during the dominant phase (increased monocular contrast decreases the rate). A model is developed to reflect these ideas. These results support a reciprocal inhibition oscillator as the underlying mechanism of binocular rivalry.     

Visual motion retards alternations between conflicting perceptual interpretations

When the visual system is faced with conflicting or ambiguous stimulus information, visual perception fluctuates over time. We found that perceptual alternations are slowed when inducing stimuli move within the visual field, constantly engaging fresh, unadapted neural tissue. During binocular rivalry, dominance durations were longer when rival figures moved compared to when they were stationary, yielding lower alternation rates. Rate was not reduced, however, when observers tracked the moving targets, keeping the images on approximately the same retinal area. Alternations were reliably triggered when rival targets passed through a local region of the visual field preadapted to one of the rival targets. During viewing of a kinetic globe whose direction of rotation was ambiguous, observers experienced fewer alternations in perceived direction when the globe moved around the visual field or when the globe's axis of rotation changed continuously. Evidently, local neural adaptation is a key ingredient in the instability of perception.     

Fusion and rivalry are dependent on the perceptual meaning of visual stimuli

We view the world with two eyes and yet are typically only aware of a single, coherent image. Arguably the simplest explanation for this is that the visual system unites the two monocular stimuli into a common stream that eventually leads to a single coherent sensation. However, this notion is inconsistent with the well-known phenomenon of rivalry; when physically different stimuli project to the same retinal location, the ensuing perception alternates between the two monocular views in space and time. Although fundamental for understanding the principles of binocular vision and visual awareness, the mechanisms under-lying binocular rivalry remain controversial. Specifically, there is uncertainty about what determines whether monocular images undergo fusion or rivalry. By taking advantage of the perceptual phenomenon of color contrast, we show that physically identical monocular stimuli tend to rival-not fuse-when they signify different objects at the same location in visual space. Conversely, when physically different monocular stimuli are likely to represent the same object at the same location in space, fusion is more likely to result. The data suggest that what competes for visual awareness in the two eyes is not the physical similarity between images but the similarity in their perceptual/empirical meaning.     

The effect of interocular phase difference on perceived contrast

Binocular vision is traditionally treated as two processes: the fusion of similar images, and the interocular suppression of dissimilar images (e.g. binocular rivalry). Recent work has demonstrated that interocular suppression is phase-insensitive, whereas binocular summation occurs only when stimuli are in phase. But how do these processes affect our perception of binocular contrast? We measured perceived contrast using a matching paradigm for a wide range of interocular phase offsets (0–180°) and matching contrasts (2–32%). Our results revealed a complex interaction between contrast and interocular phase. At low contrasts, perceived contrast reduced monotonically with increasing phase offset, by up to a factor of 1.6. At higher contrasts the pattern was non-monotonic: perceived contrast was veridical for in-phase and antiphase conditions, and monocular presentation, but increased a little at intermediate phase angles. These findings challenge a recent model in which contrast perception is phase-invariant. The results were predicted by a binocular contrast gain control model. The model involves monocular gain controls with interocular suppression from positive and negative phase channels, followed by summation across eyes and then across space. Importantly, this model—applied to conditions with vertical disparity—has only a single (zero) disparity channel and embodies both fusion and suppression processes within a single framework.     

Influence of Retinal Image Shifts and Extra-Retinal Eye Movement Signals on Binocular Rivalry Alternations

Previous studies have indicated that saccadic eye movements correlate positively with perceptual alternations in binocular rivalry, presumably because the foveal image changes resulting from saccades, rather than the eye movement themselves, cause switches in awareness. Recently, however, we found evidence that retinal image shifts elicit so-called onset rivalry and not percept switches as such. These findings raise the interesting question whether onset rivalry may account for correlations between saccades and percept switches.We therefore studied binocular rivalry when subjects made eye movements across a visual stimulus and compared it with the rivalry in a ‘replay’ condition in which subjects maintained fixation while the same retinal displacements were reproduced by stimulus displacements on the screen. We used dichoptic random-dot motion stimuli viewed through a stereoscope, and measured eye and eyelid movements with scleral search-coils.Positive correlations between retinal image shifts and perceptual switches were observed for both saccades and stimulus jumps, but only for switches towards the subjects'' preferred eye at stimulus onset. A similar asymmetry was observed for blink-induced stimulus interruptions. Moreover, for saccades, amplitude appeared crucial as the positive correlation persisted for small stimulus jumps, but not for small saccades (amplitudes < 1°). These findings corroborate our tenet that saccades elicit a form of onset rivalry, and that rivalry is modulated by extra-retinal eye movement signals.     

Suppressed patterns alter vision during binocular rivalry

Binocular rivalry occurs when incongruent patterns are presented to corresponding regions of the retinas, leading to fluctuations of awareness between the patterns . One attribute of a stimulus may rival whereas another may combine between the eyes , but it is typically assumed that the dominant features are perceived veridically. Here, we show this is not necessarily the case and that a suppressed visual feature can alter dominant perception. The cortical representations of oriented gratings can interact even when one of them is perceptually suppressed, such that the perceived orientation of the dominant grating is systematically biased depending on the orientation of the suppressed grating. A suppressed inducing pattern has the same qualitative effect as a visible one, but suppression reduces effective contrast by a factor of around six. A simple neural model quantifies and helps explain these illusions. These results demonstrate that binocular rivalry suppression operates in a graded fashion across multiple sites in the visual hierarchy rather than truncating processing at a single site and that suppressed visual information can alter dominant vision in real-time.     

Single units and conscious vision.

Figures that can be seen in more than one way are invaluable tools for the study of the neural basis of visual awareness, because such stimuli permit the dissociation of the neural responses that underlie what we perceive at any given time from those forming the sensory representation of a visual pattern. To study the former type of responses, monkeys were subjected to binocular rivalry, and the response of neurons in a number of different visual areas was studied while the animals reported their alternating percepts by pulling levers. Perception-related modulations of neural activity were found to occur to different extents in different cortical visual areas. The cells that were affected by suppression were almost exclusively binocular, and their proportion was found to increase in the higher processing stages of the visual system. The strongest correlations between neural activity and perception were observed in the visual areas of the temporal lobe. A strikingly large number of neurons in the early visual areas remained active during the perceptual suppression of the stimulus, a finding suggesting that conscious visual perception might be mediated by only a subset of the cells exhibiting stimulus selective responses. These physiological findings, together with a number of recent psychophysical studies, offer a new explanation of the phenomenon of binocular rivalry. Indeed, rivalry has long been considered to be closely linked with binocular fusion and stereopsis, and the sequences of dominance and suppression have been viewed as the result of competition between the two monocular channels. The physiological data presented here are incompatible with this interpretation. Rather than reflecting interocular competition, the rivalry is most probably between the two different central neural representations generated by the dichoptically presented stimuli. The mechanisms of rivalry are probably the same as, or very similar to, those underlying multistable perception in general, and further physiological studies might reveal much about the neural mechanisms of our perceptual organization.     

Stimulus motion propels traveling waves in binocular rivalry

State transitions in the nervous system often take shape as traveling waves, whereby one neural state is replaced by another across space in a wave-like manner. In visual perception, transitions between the two mutually exclusive percepts that alternate when the two eyes view conflicting stimuli (binocular rivalry) may also take shape as traveling waves. The properties of these waves point to a neural substrate of binocular rivalry alternations that have the hallmark signs of lower cortical areas. In a series of experiments, we show a potent interaction between traveling waves in binocular rivalry and stimulus motion. The course of the traveling wave is biased in the motion direction of the suppressed stimulus that gains dominance by means of the wave-like transition. Thus, stimulus motion may propel the traveling wave across the stimulus to the extent that the stimulus motion dictates the traveling wave's direction completely. Using a computational model, we show that a speed-dependent asymmetry in lateral inhibitory connections between retinotopically organized and motion-sensitive neurons can explain our results. We argue that such a change in suppressive connections may play a vital role in the resolution of dynamic occlusion situations.     

Quantum formalism to describe binocular rivalry

On the basis of the general character and operation of the process of perception, a formalism is sought to mathematically describe the subjective or abstract/mental process of perception. It is shown that the formalism of orthodox quantum theory of measurement, where the observer plays a key role, is a broader mathematical foundation which can be adopted to describe the dynamics of the subjective experience. The mathematical formalism describes the psychophysical dynamics of the subjective or cognitive experience as communicated to us by the subject. Subsequently, the formalism is used to describe simple perception processes and, in particular, to describe the probability distribution of dominance duration obtained from the testimony of subjects experiencing binocular rivalry. Using this theory and parameters based on known values of neuronal oscillation frequencies and firing rates, the calculated probability distribution of dominance duration of rival states in binocular rivalry under various conditions is found to be in good agreement with available experimental data. This theory naturally explains an observed marked increase in dominance duration in binocular rivalry upon periodic interruption of stimulus and yields testable predictions for the distribution of perceptual alteration in time.