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.

[1]  N. Logothetis Single units and conscious vision. , 1998, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[2]  Fang Fang,et al.  Stabilized Structure from Motion without Disparity Induces Disparity Adaptation , 2004, Current Biology.

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

[4]  R. Andersen,et al.  Perception of three-dimensional structure from motion , 1998, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

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

[6]  D. Purves,et al.  Similarities in normal and binocularly rivalrous viewing. , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[7]  Joel Pearson,et al.  Determinants of visual awareness following interruptions during rivalry. , 2004, Journal of vision.

[8]  H. Wallach,et al.  The kinetic depth effect. , 1953, Journal of experimental psychology.

[9]  J. Pettigrew Searching for the Switch: Neural Bases for Perceptual Rivalry Alternations , 2001 .

[10]  W. Levelt The alternation process in binocular rivalry , 1966 .

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

[12]  R. van Ee,et al.  Attention-biased multi-stable surface perception in three-dimensional structure-from-motion. , 2003, Journal of vision.

[13]  R. Blake © 2001 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands. 5 A Primer on Binocular Rivalry, Including Current Controversies , 2000 .

[14]  Randolph Blake,et al.  Visual Motion Retards Alternations between Conflicting Perceptual Interpretations , 2003, Neuron.

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