Elsevier

Vision Research

Volume 15, Issue 7, July 1975, Pages 855-859
Vision Research

Effect of binocular rivalry suppression on the motion aftereffect

https://doi.org/10.1016/0042-6989(75)90266-7Get rights and content

Abstract

The relative loci within the visual system of the site of the motion aftereffect (MAE) and the site of binocular rivalry suppression was inferred by measuring the magnitude of the MAE when the inducing motion was phenomenally suppressed for > 50 per cent of the inspection period. The MAE magnitude was a function of the duration of physical impingement of the inducing stimulus; the state of suppression exerted no effect, thereby implying that the site of suppression does not occur before the site of the MAE. This result, together with other data, is interpreted to mean that the site of suppression is cortical.

Reference (27)

  • BradshawJ.L.

    Brightness of the dominant field and pupillary reflexes in retinal rivalry

    Br. J. Psychol.

    (1969)
  • CobbW.A. et al.

    Cerebral potentials evoked by pattern reversal and their suppression in visual rivalry

    Nature. Lond.

    (1967)
  • CollyerS.C. et al.

    Objective measurement of dominance control in binocular rivalry

    Percept. Psychophys.

    (1970)
  • Cited by (109)

    • Visual adaptation and 7T fMRI reveal facial identity processing in the human brain under shallow interocular suppression

      2021, NeuroImage
      Citation Excerpt :

      Due to interocular contrast normalization in the primary visual cortex (Moradi and Heeger, 2009), higher CFS contrast in one eye would reduce the V1 response to the face stimuli presented to the fellow eye. It has been shown that adaptation to low level visual features could survive interocular suppression (Blake and Fox, 1974; Lehmkuhle and Fox, 1975; Montaser-Kouhsari et al., 2004; O'Shea and Crassini, 1981; Rajimehr, 2004; White et al., 1978). It was also reported that when the adapting and test faces were presented in the same size and location to the same eye, face shape adaptation was detected from interocularly suppressed faces (Stein et al., 2011), presumably due to adaptation of low level features.

    • Size-invariant but location-specific object-viewpoint adaptation in the absence of awareness

      2019, Cognition
      Citation Excerpt :

      Many studies have shown that invisible visual stimuli could be processed and evoked robust neural responses as well as perceptual consequences. Prolonged exposure to simple or basic visual properties (e.g., contrast and orientation) presented without awareness resulted in visual aftereffects (Blake & Fox, 1974; He & MacLeod, 2001; He, Cavanagh, & Intriligator, 1996; Lehmkuhle & Fox, 1975), indicating neural adaptation could occur without awareness. Such unconscious processing is not limited to simple or low-level visual features, but could extend to complex visual stimuli (Alais & Blake, 1999; Montoro, Luna, & Ortells, 2014; Moore & Egeth, 1997; Wang, Weng, & He, 2012) as well as semantic information (e.g., words) (Jiang, Costello, & He, 2007).

    • The temporal course of recovery from brief (sub-second) adaptations to spatial contrast

      2012, Vision Research
      Citation Excerpt :

      Despite our statistical analysis revealed a better fit for exponential models, it is worth to note that our findings support also the presence of multiple models describing the recovery from sub-second adaptations to spatial contrast. There is indeed psychophysical evidence that the recovery from contrast adaptation is better described by power functions (Greenlee et al., 1991; Magnussen & Greenlee, 1985; Rose & Evans, 1983; Rose & Lowe, 1982), whereas the recovery of other forms of adaptation (e.g., motion) is better described by exponential decay models with the recovery time proportional to the square root of adaptation time (Hershenson, 1989; Lehmkuhle & Fox, 1975; Rose, 1992). However, there is evidence of multiple models (i.e., power and exponential) also for recovery from long adaptation durations to spatial contrast (see Bodinger, 1978; Lorenceau, 1987).

    • The uttal tetralogy of cognitive neuroscience

      2022, The Uttal Tetralogy of Cognitive Neuroscience
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text