Dataset Information

Intrinsic timescales of sensory integration for motion perception.

ABSTRACT: A subject-specific process of perceptual decision making is of importance to how the brain translates its interpretation of sensory information into behavior. In particular, a number of studies reported substantial variation across the observers' decision behavior, which may reflect different profiles of evidence accumulated by each individual. However, a detailed profile of perceptual integration has not yet been verified from human behavioral data. To address the issue, we precisely measured the time course of sensory integration, as the "sensory integration kernel" of subjects, using a coherence-varying motion discrimination task. We found that each subject has a distinct profile of sensory integration. We observed that kernel size (maximum sensory integration interval) is consistent within subjects, independent of external stimuli conditions. The observed kernel could accurately predict subject-specific perceptual behaviors and explain the inter-individual variation of observed behaviors. Surprisingly, the performance of most subjects did not improve in proportion to increased duration of the stimulus, but was maximized when the stimulus duration matched their kernel size. We also found that the observed kernel size was strongly correlated with the subject-specific perceptual characteristics for illusory motion. Our results suggest that perceptual decisions arise from intrinsic decision dynamics, and on individual timescales of sensory integration.

SUBMITTER: Choi W

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6408463 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Intrinsic timescales of sensory integration for motion perception.

Choi Woochul W Paik Se-Bum SB

Scientific reports 20190308 1

A subject-specific process of perceptual decision making is of importance to how the brain translates its interpretation of sensory information into behavior. In particular, a number of studies reported substantial variation across the observers' decision behavior, which may reflect different profiles of evidence accumulated by each individual. However, a detailed profile of perceptual integration has not yet been verified from human behavioral data. To address the issue, we precisely measured t ...[more]

PMID: 30850689

Similar Datasets

Project description:The perception of depth from relative motion is believed to be a slow process that "builds-up" over a period of observation. However, in the case of motion parallax, the potential accuracy of the depth estimate suffers as the observer translates during the viewing period. Our recent quantitative model for the perception of depth from motion parallax proposes that relative object depth (d) can be determined from retinal image motion (d?/dt), pursuit eye movement (d?/dt), and fixation distance (f) by the formula: d/f?d?/d?. Given the model's dynamics, it is important to know the integration time required by the visual system to recover d? and d?, and then estimate d. Knowing the minimum integration time reveals the incumbent error in this process. A depth-phase discrimination task was used to determine the time necessary to perceive depth-sign from motion parallax. Observers remained stationary and viewed a briefly translating random-dot motion parallax stimulus. Stimulus duration varied between trials. Fixation on the translating stimulus was monitored and enforced with an eye-tracker. The study found that relative depth discrimination can be performed with presentations as brief as 16.6 ms, with only two stimulus frames providing both retinal image motion and the stimulus window motion for pursuit (mean range=16.6-33.2 ms). This was found for conditions in which, prior to stimulus presentation, the eye was engaged in ongoing pursuit or the eye was stationary. A large high-contrast masking stimulus disrupted depth-discrimination for stimulus presentations less than 70-75 ms in both pursuit and stationary conditions. This interval might be linked to ocular-following response eye-movement latencies. We conclude that neural mechanisms serving depth from motion parallax generate a depth estimate much more quickly than previously believed. We propose that additional sluggishness might be due to the visual system's attempt to determine the maximum d?/d? ratio for a selection of points on a complicated stimulus.

Project description:When moving around in the world, the human visual system uses both motion and form information to estimate the direction of self-motion (i.e., heading). However, little is known about cortical areas in charge of this task. This brain-imaging study addressed this question by using visual stimuli consisting of randomly distributed dot pairs oriented toward a locus on a screen (the form-defined focus of expansion [FoE]) but moved away from a different locus (the motion-defined FoE) to simulate observer translation. We first fixed the motion-defined FoE location and shifted the form-defined FoE location. We then made the locations of the motion- and the form-defined FoEs either congruent (at the same location in the display) or incongruent (on the opposite sides of the display). The motion- or the form-defined FoE shift was the same in the two types of stimuli, but the perceived heading direction shifted for the congruent, but not for the incongruent stimuli. Participants (both sexes) made a task-irrelevant (contrast discrimination) judgment during scanning. Searchlight and ROI-based multivoxel pattern analysis revealed that early visual areas V1, V2, and V3 responded to either the motion- or the form-defined FoE shift. After V3, only the dorsal areas V3a and V3B/KO responded to such shifts. Furthermore, area V3B/KO shows a significantly higher decoding accuracy for the congruent than the incongruent stimuli. Our results provide direct evidence showing that area V3B/KO does not simply respond to motion and form cues but integrates these two cues for the perception of heading.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Human survival relies on accurate perception of self-motion. The visual system uses both motion (optic flow) and form cues for the perception of the direction of self-motion (heading). Although human brain areas for processing optic flow and form structure are well identified, the areas responsible for integrating these two cues for the perception of self-motion remain unknown. We conducted fMRI experiments and used multivoxel pattern analysis technique to find human brain areas that can decode the shift in heading specified by each cue alone and the two cues combined. We found that motion and form cues are first processed in the early visual areas and then are likely integrated in the higher dorsal area V3B/KO for the final estimation of heading.

Project description:Introduction:The subjective visual vertical (SVV) measures the perception of a person's spatial orientation relative to gravity. Weighted central integration of vestibular, visual, and proprioceptive inputs is essential for SVV perception. Without any visual references and minimal proprioceptive contribution, the static SVV reflects balance of the otolith organs. Normal aging is associated with bilateral and progressive decline in otolith organ function, but age-dependent effects on SVV are inconclusive. Studies on sensory reweighting for visual vertical and multisensory integration strategies reveal age-dependent differences, but most studies have included elderly participants in comparison to younger adults. The aim of this study was to compare young adults with older adults, an age group younger than the elderly. Methods:Thirty-three young and 28 older adults (50-65 years old) adjusted a tilted line accurately to their perceived vertical. The rod's final position from true vertical was recorded as tilt error in degrees. For otolithic balance, visual vertical was recorded in the dark without any visual references. The rod and frame task (RFT) with tilted disorienting visual frames was used for creating visuovestibular conflict. We adopted Nyborg's analysis method to derive the rod and frame effect (RFE) and trial-to-trial variability measures. Rod alignment times were also analyzed. Results:There was no age difference in signed tilts of SVV without visual reference. There was an age effect on RFE and on overall trial-to-trial variability of rod tilt, with older adults displaying larger frame effects and greater variability in rod tilts. Alignment times were longer in the tilted-frame conditions for both groups and in the older adults compared to their younger counterparts. The association between tilt accuracy and tilt precision was significant for older adults only during visuovestibular conflict, revealing an increase in RFE with an increase in tilt variability. Correlation of ? SVV, which represents vestibular input precision, with RFE yielded exactly the same contribution of ? SVV to the variance in RFE for both age groups. Conclusions:Older adults have balanced otolithic input in an upright position. Increased reliance on visual cues may begin at ages younger than what is considered elderly. Increased alignment times for older adults may create a broader time window for integration of relevant and irrelevant sensory information, thus enhancing their multisensory integration. In parallel with the elderly, older adults may differ from young adults in their integration of sensory cues for visual vertical perception.

Dataset Information

Intrinsic timescales of sensory integration for motion perception.

Publications

Intrinsic timescales of sensory integration for motion perception.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets