Brain mechanisms for simple perception and bistable perception

Significance When viewing an image with multiple interpretations such as the Necker cube, subjective perception alternates stochastically between the different interpretations. This phenomenon provides a well-controlled experimental approach to studying how the brain responds to ambiguities in sensory inputs—a ubiquitous problem in dealing with natural environment. We found that, compared with simple perception devoid of ambiguities, bistable perception requires additional higher-order brain regions and dramatically enhanced top-down and bottom-up influences in the brain. Intermittent viewing of ambiguous images elicits even stronger top-down brain activity. These results help elucidate the mechanisms of visual perception by demonstrating an active top-down inferential process. When faced with ambiguous sensory inputs, subjective perception alternates between the different interpretations in a stochastic manner. Such multistable perception phenomena have intrigued scientists and laymen alike for over a century. Despite rigorous investigations, the underlying mechanisms of multistable perception remain elusive. Recent studies using multivariate pattern analysis revealed that activity patterns in posterior visual areas correlate with fluctuating percepts. However, increasing evidence suggests that vision—and perception at large—is an active inferential process involving hierarchical brain systems. We applied searchlight multivariate pattern analysis to functional magnetic resonance imaging signals across the human brain to decode perceptual content during bistable perception and simple unambiguous perception. Although perceptually reflective activity patterns during simple perception localized predominantly to posterior visual regions, bistable perception involved additionally many higher-order frontoparietal and temporal regions. Moreover, compared with simple perception, both top-down and bottom-up influences were dramatically enhanced during bistable perception. We further studied the intermittent presentation of ambiguous images—a condition that is known to elicit perceptual memory. Compared with continuous presentation, intermittent presentation recruited even more higher-order regions and was accompanied by further strengthened top-down influences but relatively weakened bottom-up influences. Taken together, these results strongly support an active top-down inferential process in perception.

[1]  G. Rees,et al.  Predicting the Stream of Consciousness from Activity in Human Visual Cortex , 2005, Current Biology.

[2]  S Magnussen,et al.  The psychophysics of perceptual memory , 1999, Psychological research.

[3]  E. Lumer A neural model of binocular integration and rivalry based on the coordination of action-potential timing in primary visual cortex. , 1998, Cerebral cortex.

[4]  F. Tong,et al.  Decoding reveals the contents of visual working memory in early visual areas , 2009, Nature.

[5]  N. Logothetis,et al.  Multistable phenomena: changing views in perception , 1999, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[6]  Biyu J. He,et al.  The fMRI signal, slow cortical potential and consciousness , 2009, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[7]  M. Bar The proactive brain: using analogies and associations to generate predictions , 2007, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[8]  V. Menon,et al.  A critical role for the right fronto-insular cortex in switching between central-executive and default-mode networks , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[9]  Rainer Goebel,et al.  Information-based functional brain mapping. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[10]  Philipp Sterzer,et al.  A neural basis for inference in perceptual ambiguity , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[11]  N. Logothetis,et al.  Disrupting Parietal Function Prolongs Dominance Durations in Binocular Rivalry , 2010, Current Biology.

[12]  D. Heeger,et al.  Neuronal activity in human primary visual cortex correlates with perception during binocular rivalry , 2000, Nature Neuroscience.

[13]  E Tulving,et al.  Priming and human memory systems. , 1990, Science.

[14]  Thomas D Albright,et al.  On the Perception of Probable Things: Neural Substrates of Associative Memory, Imagery, and Perception , 2012, Neuron.

[15]  M. Raichle,et al.  Anatomic Localization and Quantitative Analysis of Gradient Refocused Echo-Planar fMRI Susceptibility Artifacts , 1997, NeuroImage.

[16]  G. Deco,et al.  Neuronal Adaptation Effects in Decision Making , 2011, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[17]  D. Bub,et al.  The face of race: Revealing the visual prototype of Black and White faces in Caucasian subjects , 2010 .

[18]  Christof Koch,et al.  Single-neuron correlates of subjective vision in the human medial temporal lobe , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[19]  Y. Benjamini,et al.  Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing , 1995 .

[20]  Theodor Landis,et al.  Right parietal brain activity precedes perceptual alternation of bistable stimuli. , 2009, Cerebral cortex.

[21]  Geraint Rees,et al.  Variability of perceptual multistability: from brain state to individual trait , 2012, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[22]  Jeff H. Duyn,et al.  Temporal dynamics of the BOLD fMRI impulse response , 2005, NeuroImage.

[23]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  A theory of cortical responses , 2005, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[24]  R. Blake,et al.  Neural bases of binocular rivalry , 2006, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[25]  M. Brass,et al.  Unconscious determinants of free decisions in the human brain , 2008, Nature Neuroscience.

[26]  David L. Sheinberg,et al.  The role of temporal cortical areas in perceptual organization. , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[27]  N. Logothetis,et al.  Local field potential reflects perceptual suppression in monkey visual cortex , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[28]  Rainer Goebel,et al.  The identification of interacting networks in the brain using fMRI: Model selection, causality and deconvolution , 2011, NeuroImage.

[29]  M. Fox,et al.  Intrinsic functional relations between human cerebral cortex and thalamus. , 2008, Journal of neurophysiology.

[30]  Stanislas Dehaene,et al.  An accumulator model for spontaneous neural activity prior to self-initiated movement , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[31]  Randolph Blake,et al.  Hierarchy of cortical responses underlying binocular rivalry , 2007, Nature Neuroscience.

[32]  Zoe Kourtzi,et al.  Perceptual experience modulates cortical circuits involved in visual awareness , 2012, The European journal of neuroscience.

[33]  M. Mintun,et al.  Brain work and brain imaging. , 2006, Annual review of neuroscience.

[34]  D. Mumford On the computational architecture of the neocortex , 2004, Biological Cybernetics.

[35]  R. S. J. Frackowiak,et al.  Human brain activity during spontaneously reversing perception of ambiguous figures , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[36]  M. Corbetta,et al.  Top-Down Control of Human Visual Cortex by Frontal and Parietal Cortex in Anticipatory Visual Spatial Attention , 2008, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[37]  Stephen A. Engel,et al.  Interocular rivalry revealed in the human cortical blind-spot representation , 2001, Nature.

[38]  Stefan Pollmann,et al.  PyMVPA: a Python Toolbox for Multivariate Pattern Analysis of fMRI Data , 2009, Neuroinformatics.

[39]  P. Walker Orientation-Selective Inhibition and Binocular Rivalry , 1978, Perception.

[40]  Andreas Kleinschmidt,et al.  Spontaneous local variations in ongoing neural activity bias perceptual decisions , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[41]  Jochen Braun,et al.  Attractors and noise: Twin drivers of decisions and multistability , 2010, NeuroImage.

[42]  Christine Preibisch,et al.  Neural Correlates of Spontaneous Direction Reversals in Ambiguous Apparent Visual Motion , 2001, NeuroImage.

[43]  Christopher J. Aura,et al.  Divergence of fMRI and neural signals in V1 during perceptual suppression in the awake monkey , 2008, Nature Neuroscience.

[44]  Geraint Rees,et al.  Structural and functional fractionation of right superior parietal cortex in bistable perception , 2011, Current Biology.

[45]  David J. Field,et al.  How Close Are We to Understanding V1? , 2005, Neural Computation.

[46]  Laurie A. Miller,et al.  Perceptual flexibility after frontal or temporal lobectomy , 1994, Neuropsychologia.

[47]  Alexander Maier,et al.  Perception of Temporally Interleaved Ambiguous Patterns , 2003, Current Biology.

[48]  Michael Bach,et al.  Ambiguous Figures – What Happens in the Brain When Perception Changes But Not the Stimulus , 2011, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[49]  H. Kornhuber,et al.  [CHANGES IN THE BRAIN POTENTIAL IN VOLUNTARY MOVEMENTS AND PASSIVE MOVEMENTS IN MAN: READINESS POTENTIAL AND REAFFERENT POTENTIALS]. , 1965, Pflugers Archiv fur die gesamte Physiologie des Menschen und der Tiere.

[50]  N. Logothetis,et al.  Neuronal correlates of subjective visual perception. , 1989, Science.

[51]  Paul F. Bulakowski,et al.  Shared attentional resources for global and local motion processing. , 2007, Journal of vision.

[52]  G. Rees,et al.  The Neural Bases of Multistable Perception , 2022 .

[53]  Ronald Olson,et al.  Reversibility of the Necker Cube: VII. Reversal Rate as a Function of Figure-on and Figure-off Durations , 1966 .

[54]  Thomas C. Toppino,et al.  Enduring interest in perceptual ambiguity: alternating views of reversible figures. , 2004, Psychological bulletin.

[55]  Anil K. Seth,et al.  A MATLAB toolbox for Granger causal connectivity analysis , 2010, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[56]  C. Blundo,et al.  Perception of ambiguous figures after focal brain lesions , 1990, Neuropsychologia.

[57]  Gustavo Deco,et al.  Neuronal Discharges and Gamma Oscillations Explicitly Reflect Visual Consciousness in the Lateral Prefrontal Cortex , 2012, Neuron.

[58]  N. Logothetis,et al.  Visual competition , 2002, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[59]  N. Logothetis,et al.  Activity changes in early visual cortex reflect monkeys' percepts during binocular rivalry , 1996, Nature.

[60]  Joel Pearson,et al.  Sensory memory for ambiguous vision , 2008, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[61]  R. Passingham,et al.  Reading Hidden Intentions in the Human Brain , 2007, Current Biology.

[62]  Nicole C. Rust,et al.  Do We Know What the Early Visual System Does? , 2005, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[63]  D. Leopold,et al.  Neural activity in the visual thalamus reflects perceptual suppression , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[64]  David A. Leopold,et al.  Stable perception of visually ambiguous patterns , 2002, Nature Neuroscience.

[65]  Hugh R Wilson,et al.  Computational evidence for a rivalry hierarchy in vision , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[66]  M. Torrens Co-Planar Stereotaxic Atlas of the Human Brain—3-Dimensional Proportional System: An Approach to Cerebral Imaging, J. Talairach, P. Tournoux. Georg Thieme Verlag, New York (1988), 122 pp., 130 figs. DM 268 , 1990 .

[67]  A. Yuille,et al.  Opinion TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences Vol.10 No.7 July 2006 Special Issue: Probabilistic models of cognition Vision as Bayesian inference: analysis by synthesis? , 2022 .

[68]  Georgios A. Keliris,et al.  The Role of the Primary Visual Cortex in Perceptual Suppression of Salient Visual Stimuli , 2010, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[69]  John H. R. Maunsell,et al.  No binocular rivalry in the LGN of alert macaque monkeys , 1996, Vision Research.

[70]  N. Logothetis What we can do and what we cannot do with fMRI , 2008, Nature.

[71]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Binocular Rivalry and Visual Awareness in Human Extrastriate Cortex , 1998, Neuron.

[72]  Alan W Freeman,et al.  Multistage model for binocular rivalry. , 2005, Journal of neurophysiology.

[73]  Hermann von Helmholtz,et al.  Treatise on Physiological Optics , 1962 .

[74]  Rainer Goebel,et al.  Apparent Motion: Event-Related Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Perceptual Switches and States , 2002, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[75]  A. Baddeley Working memory: looking back and looking forward , 2003, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[76]  R. van Ee,et al.  Percept-choice sequences driven by interrupted ambiguous stimuli: a low-level neural model. , 2007, Journal of vision.

[77]  H. Kornhuber,et al.  Hirnpotentialänderungen bei Willkürbewegungen und passiven Bewegungen des Menschen: Bereitschaftspotential und reafferente Potentiale , 1965, Pflüger's Archiv für die gesamte Physiologie des Menschen und der Tiere.

[78]  Tai Sing Lee,et al.  Hierarchical Bayesian inference in the visual cortex. , 2003, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[79]  Jochen Braun,et al.  Bistable Perception Modeled as Competing Stochastic Integrations at Two Levels , 2009, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[80]  O. Sporns,et al.  Complex brain networks: graph theoretical analysis of structural and functional systems , 2009, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[81]  Randolph Blake,et al.  The Role of Frontal and Parietal Brain Areas in Bistable Perception , 2011, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[82]  G. Rees,et al.  Neural correlates of perceptual rivalry in the human brain. , 1998, Science.

[83]  Sabine Kastner,et al.  Neural correlates of binocular rivalry in the human lateral geniculate nucleus , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.

[84]  P. O. Bishop Neurophysiology of Binocular Single Vision and Stereopsis , 1973 .

[85]  Gustavo Deco,et al.  A model of binocular rivalry based on competition in IT , 2002, Neurocomputing.

[86]  D Mumford,et al.  On the computational architecture of the neocortex. II. The role of cortico-cortical loops. , 1992, Biological cybernetics.

[87]  Gideon Paul Caplovitz,et al.  Bistable illusory rebound motion: Event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging of perceptual states and switches , 2006, NeuroImage.

[88]  Peter Dayan,et al.  A Hierarchical Model of Binocular Rivalry , 1998, Neural Computation.

[89]  Sabine Windmann,et al.  Role of the Prefrontal Cortex in Attentional Control over Bistable Vision , 2006, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[90]  Carson C. Chow,et al.  A Spiking Neuron Model for Binocular Rivalry , 2000 .

[91]  R. Deichmann,et al.  Eye-specific effects of binocular rivalry in the human lateral geniculate nucleus , 2005, Nature.

[92]  Geraint Rees,et al.  A Neural Basis for Percept Stabilization in Binocular Rivalry , 2008, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[93]  Kenneth A. Norman,et al.  Recollection, Familiarity, and Cortical Reinstatement: A Multivoxel Pattern Analysis , 2009, Neuron.

[94]  Rainer Goebel,et al.  On the functional relevance of frontal cortex for passive and voluntarily controlled bistable vision. , 2011, Cerebral cortex.

[95]  J. Richard Neuronal Integration in the Visual Cortex and Its Significance for Visual Information , 2012 .

[96]  F. Tong,et al.  Can attention selectively bias bistable perception? Differences between binocular rivalry and ambiguous figures. , 2004, Journal of vision.

[97]  Mark D'Esposito,et al.  The continuing challenge of understanding and modeling hemodynamic variation in fMRI , 2012, NeuroImage.

[98]  Steven L. Bressler,et al.  Wiener–Granger Causality: A well established methodology , 2011, NeuroImage.