Visible binocular beats from invisible monocular stimuli during binocular rivalry

When two qualitatively different stimuli are presented at the same time, one to each eye, the stimuli can either integrate or compete with each other. When they compete, one of the two stimuli is alternately suppressed, a phenomenon called binocular rivalry [1,2]. When they integrate, observers see some form of the combined stimuli. Many different properties (for example, shape or color) of the two stimuli can induce binocular rivalry. Not all differences result in rivalry, however. Visual 'beats', for example, are the result of integration of high-frequency flicker between the two eyes [3,4], and are thus a binocular fusion phenomenon. It remains in dispute whether binocular fusion and rivalry can co-exist with one another [5-7]. Here, we report that rivalry and beats, two apparently opposing phenomena, can be perceived at the same time within the same spatial location. We hypothesized that the interocular difference in visual attributes that are predominantly processed in the Parvocellular pathway will lead to rivalry, and differences in visual attributes that are predominantly processed in the Magnocellular pathway tend to integrate. Further predictions based on this hypothesis were tested and confirmed.     

Binocular rivalry requires visual attention

An interocular conflict arises when different images are presented to each eye at the same spatial location. The visual system resolves this conflict through binocular rivalry: observers consciously perceive spontaneous alternations between the two images. Visual attention is generally important for resolving competition between neural representations. However, given the seemingly spontaneous and automatic nature of binocular rivalry, the role of attention in resolving interocular competition remains unclear. Here we test whether visual attention is necessary to?produce rivalry. Using an EEG frequency-tagging method to track cortical representations of the conflicting images, we show that when attention was diverted away, rivalry stopped. The EEG data further suggested that the neural representations of the dichoptic images combined without attention. Thus, attention is necessary for dichoptic images to be engaged in sustained rivalry and may be generally required for resolving conflicting, potentially ambiguous input and giving a single interpretation access to consciousness.     

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.     

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.     

The role of temporally coarse form processing during binocular rivalry

Presenting the eyes with spatially mismatched images causes a phenomenon known as binocular rivalry-a fluctuation of awareness whereby each eye's image alternately determines perception. Binocular rivalry is used to study interocular conflict resolution and the formation of conscious awareness from retinal images. Although the spatial determinants of rivalry have been well-characterized, the temporal determinants are still largely unstudied. We confirm a previous observation that conflicting images do not need to be presented continuously or simultaneously to elicit binocular rivalry. This process has a temporal limit of about 350 ms, which is an order of magnitude larger than the visual system's temporal resolution. We characterize this temporal limit of binocular rivalry by showing that it is independent of low-level information such as interocular timing differences, contrast-reversals, stimulus energy, and eye-of-origin information. This suggests the temporal factors maintaining rivalry relate more to higher-level form information, than to low-level visual information. Systematically comparing the role of form and motion-the processing of which may be assigned to ventral and dorsal visual pathways, respectively-reveals that this temporal limit is determined by form conflict rather than motion conflict. Together, our findings demonstrate that binocular conflict resolution depends on temporally coarse form-based processing, possibly originating in the ventral visual pathway.     

Bistable percepts in the brain: FMRI contrasts monocular pattern rivalry and binocular rivalry

The neural correlates of binocular rivalry have been actively debated in recent years, and are of considerable interest as they may shed light on mechanisms of conscious awareness. In a related phenomenon, monocular rivalry, a composite image is shown to both eyes. The subject experiences perceptual alternations in which the two stimulus components alternate in clarity or salience. The experience is similar to perceptual alternations in binocular rivalry, although the reduction in visibility of the suppressed component is greater for binocular rivalry, especially at higher stimulus contrasts. We used fMRI at 3T to image activity in visual cortex while subjects perceived either monocular or binocular rivalry, or a matched non-rivalrous control condition. The stimulus patterns were left/right oblique gratings with the luminance contrast set at 9%, 18% or 36%. Compared to a blank screen, both binocular and monocular rivalry showed a U-shaped function of activation as a function of stimulus contrast, i.e. higher activity for most areas at 9% and 36%. The sites of cortical activation for monocular rivalry included occipital pole (V1, V2, V3), ventral temporal, and superior parietal cortex. The additional areas for binocular rivalry included lateral occipital regions, as well as inferior parietal cortex close to the temporoparietal junction (TPJ). In particular, higher-tier areas MT+ and V3A were more active for binocular than monocular rivalry for all contrasts. In comparison, activation in V2 and V3 was reduced for binocular compared to monocular rivalry at the higher contrasts that evoked stronger binocular perceptual suppression, indicating that the effects of suppression are not limited to interocular suppression in V1.     

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.     

Touch Interacts with Vision during Binocular Rivalry with a Tight Orientation Tuning

Multisensory integration is a common feature of the mammalian brain that allows it to deal more efficiently with the ambiguity of sensory input by combining complementary signals from several sensory sources. Growing evidence suggests that multisensory interactions can occur as early as primary sensory cortices. Here we present incompatible visual signals (orthogonal gratings) to each eye to create visual competition between monocular inputs in primary visual cortex where binocular combination would normally take place. The incompatibility prevents binocular fusion and triggers an ambiguous perceptual response in which the two images are perceived one at a time in an irregular alternation. One key function of multisensory integration is to minimize perceptual ambiguity by exploiting cross-sensory congruence. We show that a haptic signal matching one of the visual alternatives helps disambiguate visual perception during binocular rivalry by both prolonging the dominance period of the congruent visual stimulus and by shortening its suppression period. Importantly, this interaction is strictly tuned for orientation, with a mismatch as small as 7.5° between visual and haptic orientations sufficient to annul the interaction. These results indicate important conclusions: first, that vision and touch interact at early levels of visual processing where interocular conflicts are first detected and orientation tunings are narrow, and second, that haptic input can influence visual signals outside of visual awareness, bringing a stimulus made invisible by binocular rivalry suppression back to awareness sooner than would occur without congruent haptic input.     

The interaction between binocular rivalry and negative afterimages

Afterimage formation, historically attributed to retinal mechanisms, may also involve postretinal process. Consistent with this notion are results from experiments, reported here, investigating the interaction between binocular rivalry and negative afterimages (AIs). In Experiment 1, one eye was exposed to a grating never consciously experienced by the observer because this grating remained suppressed in rivalry throughout induction (the exclusively dominant stimulus was designed to preclude formation of an AI). As expected, the suppressed grating generated a vivid AI whose orientation could be accurately identified; not surprisingly, the strength of this AI varied with induction contrast. Experiment 2 revealed, however, that the strength of this AI produced during suppression was significantly weaker than the AI produced by that same stimulus when it was visible throughout the entire induction period, implying that some component of AI induction is susceptible to interocular suppression. In Experiment 3, AIs of dichoptic, orthogonally oriented gratings were induced in a way ensuring that one of the two gratings was exclusively dominant during the induction period. Dissimilar monocular AIs engaged in rivalry, as expected, but, surprisingly, the AI induced by the suppressed grating initially dominated. We offer two alternative accounts of this counterintuitive finding, both based on differential neural adaptation.     

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.     

Adults' awareness of faces follows newborns' looking preferences

From the first days of life, humans preferentially orient towards upright faces, likely reflecting innate subcortical mechanisms. Here, we show that binocular rivalry can reveal face detection mechanisms in adults that are surprisingly similar to inborn face detection mechanism. We used continuous flash suppression (CFS), a variant of binocular rivalry, to render stimuli invisible at the beginning of each trial and measured the time upright and inverted stimuli needed to overcome such interocular suppression. Critically, specific stimulus properties previously shown to modulate looking preferences in neonates similarly modulated adults' awareness of faces presented during CFS. First, the advantage of upright faces in overcoming CFS was strongly modulated by contrast polarity and direction of illumination. Second, schematic patterns consisting of three dark blobs were suppressed for shorter durations when the arrangement of these blobs respected the face-like configuration of the eyes and the mouth, and this effect was modulated by contrast polarity. No such effects were obtained in a binocular control experiment not involving CFS, suggesting a crucial role for face-sensitive mechanisms operating outside of conscious awareness. These findings indicate that visual awareness of faces in adults is governed by perceptual mechanisms that are sensitive to similar stimulus properties as those modulating newborns' face preferences.     

Local factors determine the stabilization of monocular ambiguous and binocular rivalry stimuli

Perceptual alternation in viewing bistable stimuli can be slowed or halted if the stimuli are presented intermittently. Memory of the recent perceptual experience has been proposed to explain this stabilization effect. But the nature of this "perceptual memory" remains unclear. By using a bistable rotating cylinder and two dichoptically presented orthogonal gratings, we explored the features that are important for the stabilization by changing a particular feature of the stimuli between alternate presentations. For the rotating cylinder, changing its color, rotating speed, size, or its stereo depth had no or minimal effect on the stabilization of its perceived rotation direction. For binocular rivalry, when the two gratings were matched in strength and then swapped between the two eyes synchronously with the intermittent presentation, the percepts were usually stabilized to one eye. In both cases, perceptual stabilization occurred only if the stimuli were presented to the same retinal location. These results suggest that the stabilization of monocular bistable stimuli is likely due to the removal of local adaptation, insensitive to the features that define the object identity. For binocular rivalry, preservation of the direction of interocular suppression rather than memory of the stimulus identity accounts for the stabilization effect.     

Neurontropy,an entropy-like measure of neural correlation,in binocular fusion and rivalry

Dynamic random dot stereograms were generated for which the left and right arrays were either identical (100% correlation), or uncorrelated (0% correlation), or the complements of each other (-100% correlation). Any two of these three states of correlation were presented in succession and duration thresholds for detecting the transitions were measured. These thresholds were much longer when the transition went from the uncorrelated state to the correlated state than vice versa. In order to explain the detection thresholds for the various transitions a model based on the notion of an entropy-like measure (to be called neurontropy) has been proposed. It was assumed that in binocular vision both a fusional and a rivalry process operate simultaneously, but in a dual fashion. Thus the correlated state would be regarded the same way by the fusional process as the complemented state by the rivalry process. Transitions from the uncorrelated to the complemented state (and vice versa) were the most difficult to detect, a task which only the rivalry process could accomplish. The long detection thresholds indicate that the rivalry process is less efficient than the fusional process.Address Fill Oct. 1, 1976: Prof. Dr. B. Julesz     

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.     

Effects of Time-Dependent Stimuli in a Competitive Neural Network Model of Perceptual Rivalry

We analyze a competitive neural network model of perceptual rivalry that receives time-varying inputs. Time-dependence of inputs can be discrete or smooth. Spike frequency adaptation provides negative feedback that generates network oscillations when inputs are constant in time. Oscillations that resemble perceptual rivalry involve only one population being “ON” at a time, which represents the dominance of a single percept at a time. As shown in Laing and Chow (J. Comput. Neurosci. 12(1):39–53, 2002), for sufficiently high contrast, one can derive relationships between dominance times and contrast that agree with Levelt’s propositions (Levelt in On binocular rivalry, 1965). Time-dependent stimuli give rise to novel network oscillations where both, one, or neither populations are “ON” at any given time. When a single population receives an interrupted stimulus, the fundamental mode of behavior we find is phase-locking, where the temporally driven population locks its state to the stimulus. Other behaviors are analyzed as bifurcations from this forced oscillation, using fast/slow analysis that exploits the slow timescale of adaptation. When both populations receive time-varying input, we find mixtures of fusion and sole population dominance, and we partition parameter space into particular oscillation types. Finally, when a single population’s input contrast is smoothly varied in time, 1:n mode-locked states arise through period-adding bifurcations beyond phase-locking. Our results provide several testable predictions for future psychophysical experiments on perceptual rivalry.     

Interactions between surround suppression and interocular suppression in human vision

Several types of suppression phenomena have been observed in the visual system. For example, the ability to detect a target stimulus is often impaired when the target is embedded in a high-contrast surround. This contextual modulation, known as surround suppression, was formerly thought to occur only in the periphery. Another type of suppression phenomena is interocular suppression, in which the sensitivity to a monocular target is reduced by a superimposed mask in the opposite eye. Here, we explored how the two types of suppression operating across different spatial regions interact with one another when they simultaneously exert suppressive influences on a common target presented at the fovea. In our experiments, a circular target grating presented to the fovea of one eye was suppressed interocularly by a noise pattern of the same size in the other eye. The foveal stimuli were either shown alone or surrounded by a monocular annular grating. The orientation and eye-of-origin of the surround grating were varied. We found that the detection of the foveal target subjected to interocular suppression was severely impaired by the addition of the surround grating, indicating strong surround suppression in the fovea. In contrast, when the interocular suppression was released by superimposing a binocular fusion ring onto both the target and the dichoptic mask, the surround suppression effect was found to be dramatically decreased. In addition, the surround suppression was found to depend on the contrast of the dichoptic noise with the greatest surround suppression effect being obtained only when the noise contrast was at an intermediate level. These findings indicate that surround suppression and interocular suppression are not independent of each other, but there are strong interactions between them. Moreover, our results suggest that strong surround suppression may also occur at the fovea and not just the periphery.     

On the role of attention in binocular rivalry: electrophysiological evidence

During binocular rivalry visual consciousness fluctuates between two dissimilar monocular images. We investigated the role of attention in this phenomenon by comparing event-related potentials (ERPs) when binocular-rivalry stimuli were attended with when they were unattended. Stimuli were dichoptic, orthogonal gratings that yielded binocular rivalry and dioptic, identically oriented gratings that yielded binocular fusion. Events were all possible orthogonal changes in orientation of one or both gratings. We had two attention conditions: In the attend-to-grating condition, participants had to report changes in perceived orientation, focussing their attention on the gratings. In the attend-to-fixation condition participants had to report changes in a central fixation target, taking attention away from the gratings. We found, surprisingly, that attending to rival gratings yielded a smaller ERP component (the N1, from 160-210 ms) than attending to the fixation target. To explain this paradoxical effect of attention, we propose that rivalry occurs in the attend-to-fixation condition (we found an ERP signature of rivalry in the form of a sustained negativity from 210-300 ms) but that the mechanism processing the stimulus changes is more adapted in the attend-to-grating condition than in the attend-to-fixation condition. This is consistent with the theory that adaptation gives rise to changes of visual consciousness during binocular rivalry.     

Independent binocular rivalry processes for motion and form

During binocular rivalry, conflicting monocular images undergo alternating suppression. This study explores rivalry suppression by probing visual sensitivity during rivalry with various probe stimuli. When two faces engage in rivalry, sensitivity to face probes is reduced 4-fold during suppression. Rivaling global motions also rivaled very deeply when probed with a global motion. However, in a surprising finding, sensitivity to face probes is completely unimpaired during global motion rivalry, and motion sensitivity is unimpaired during face rivalry. This suggests that rivalry suppression is localized to the neurons representing the image conflict, which means that probes of a different kind suffer no suppression. Sensibly, this would leave visual processes not involved in rivalry free to function normally.     

General validity of Levelt's propositions reveals common computational mechanisms for visual rivalry

The mechanisms underlying conscious visual perception are often studied with either binocular rivalry or perceptual rivalry stimuli. Despite existing research into both types of rivalry, it remains unclear to what extent their underlying mechanisms involve common computational rules. Computational models of binocular rivalry mechanisms are generally tested against Levelt's four propositions, describing the psychophysical relation between stimulus strength and alternation dynamics in binocular rivalry. Here we use a bistable rotating structure-from-motion sphere, a generally studied form of perceptual rivalry, to demonstrate that Levelt's propositions also apply to the alternation dynamics of perceptual rivalry. Importantly, these findings suggest that bistability in structure-from-motion results from active cross-inhibition between neural populations with computational principles similar to those present in binocular rivalry. Thus, although the neural input to the computational mechanism of rivalry may stem from different cortical neurons and different cognitive levels the computational principles just prior to the production of visual awareness appear to be common to the two types of rivalry.     

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.