Back from the future: Volitional postdiction of perceived apparent motion direction

&NA; Among physical events, it is impossible that an event could alter its own past for the simple reason that past events precede future events, and not vice versa. Moreover, to do so would invoke impossible self‐causation. However, mental events are constructed by physical neuronal processes that take a finite duration to execute. Given this fact, it is conceivable that later brain events could alter the ongoing interpretation of previous brain events if they arrive within this finite duration of interpretive processing, before a commitment is made to what happened. In the current study, we show that humans can volitionally influence how they perceive an ambiguous apparent motion sequence, as long as the top‐down command occurs up to 300 ms after the occurrence of the actual motion event in the world. This finding supports the view that there is a temporal integration period over which perception is constructed on the basis of both bottom‐up and top‐down inputs. HighlightsVolition could influence the perception of an ambiguous visual input postdictively.Such postdictive influence is effective up to 300 ms after the actual visual event.A temporal period integrating both bottom‐up and top‐down inputs is supported.

[1]  J. A. Gengerelli,et al.  Apparent movement in relation to homonymous and heteronymous stimulation of the cerebral hemispheres. , 1948, Journal of experimental psychology.

[2]  D. Kahneman,et al.  The reviewing of object files: Object-specific integration of information , 1992, Cognitive Psychology.

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

[4]  P. Tse,et al.  Chinese and Americans see opposite apparent motions in a Chinese character , 2000, Cognition.

[5]  Peter Ulric Tse,et al.  The duration of 3-D form analysis in transformational apparent motion , 2002, Perception & psychophysics.

[6]  Terrence J Sejnowski,et al.  Motion signals bias localization judgments: a unified explanation for the flash-lag, flash-drag, flash-jump, and Frohlich illusions. , 2007, Journal of vision.

[7]  T J Sejnowski,et al.  Motion integration and postdiction in visual awareness. , 2000, Science.

[8]  B. Scholl,et al.  Perceiving Causality after the Fact: Postdiction in the Temporal Dynamics of Causal Perception , 2006, Perception.

[9]  D G Pelli,et al.  The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: transforming numbers into movies. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[10]  D H Brainard,et al.  The Psychophysics Toolbox. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[11]  M. Grabowecky,et al.  Rapid volitional control of apparent motion during percept generation , 2013, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[12]  Peter U. Tse,et al.  Neural correlates of transformational apparent motion , 2006, NeuroImage.

[13]  Gideon P Caplovitz,et al.  Contour discontinuities subserve two types of form analysis that underlie motion processing. , 2006, Progress in brain research.

[14]  V. Ramachandran,et al.  The perception of apparent motion. , 1986, Scientific American.

[15]  L. Cohen,et al.  Cueing Attention after the Stimulus Is Gone Can Retrospectively Trigger Conscious Perception , 2013, Current Biology.

[16]  P. A. Kolers,et al.  Shape and color in apparent motion , 1976, Vision Research.