On the relationship between the psychology of visual perception and the neurophysiology of vision

Reduction of the psychology of visual perception to the neurophysiology of vision is not possible in the sense of inferring the properties of perception from the properties of neurophysiology: one cannot deduce what a monkey sees from knowledge of which cells are firing and how they are firing. Nevertheless, with the aid of linking hypotheses it is possible to demonstrate surprising and compelling relationships between neural events and behavioural responses. For example, orientation- and direction-selective cells in the first cortical visual area (VI), first studied systematically by Hubel and Wiesel, respond separately to the components of a complex pattern; but some cells in a higher area (V5 or MT) respond to the pattern and not to the individual components. Human observers cannot see the components either, which suggests that the “percept” arises beyond VI and possibly in MT, although a feedback loop cannot be ruled out In recent years, experiments have been reported in which an animal performs a behavioural task while the experimenter simultaneously records from and/or stimulates single cortical cells. These experiments strongly implicate certain extrastriate areas of visual cortex in the process of perception. The experiments also suggest likely outcomes of psychophysical experiments with human observers and some of these experiments are described.

[1]  H. Barlow,et al.  Evidence for a Physiological Explanation of the Waterfall Phenomenon and Figural After-effects , 1963, Nature.

[2]  J. Kaas,et al.  A representation of the visual field in the caudal third of the middle tempral gyrus of the owl monkey (Aotus trivirgatus). , 1971, Brain research.

[3]  S. Zeki Functional organization of a visual area in the posterior bank of the superior temporal sulcus of the rhesus monkey , 1974, The Journal of physiology.

[4]  Leslie G. Ungerleider,et al.  Object vision and spatial vision: two cortical pathways , 1983, Trends in Neurosciences.

[5]  John H. R. Maunsell,et al.  Visual processing in monkey extrastriate cortex. , 1987, Annual review of neuroscience.

[6]  W. Newsome,et al.  A selective impairment of motion perception following lesions of the middle temporal visual area (MT) , 1988, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[7]  M. J. Morgan Watching neurons discriminate , 1989, Nature.

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

[9]  K. H. Britten,et al.  Neuronal correlates of a perceptual decision , 1989, Nature.

[10]  T. D. Albright,et al.  Transparency and coherence in human motion perception , 1990, Nature.

[11]  William T. Newsome,et al.  Cortical microstimulation influences perceptual judgements of motion direction , 1990, Nature.

[12]  R. Blake,et al.  The neural site of binocular rivalry relative to the analysis of motion in the human visual system , 1990, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[13]  A causal chain in motion , 1990, Nature.

[14]  Thomas D. Albright,et al.  Neural correlates of perceptual motion coherence , 1992, Nature.

[15]  D. Alais,et al.  Reduction of a pattern-induced motion aftereffect by binocular rivalry suggests the involvement of extrastriate mechanisms , 1993, Visual Neuroscience.