Psychological and neurophysiological studies have shown that attention modulates various sorts of perceptual processing. Here, we report that attention affects the perceptual dominance of binocular rivalry. Experiments using a dichoptic masking paradigm revealed that when an observer was attending to one of the two orientations of the elements of a monocular texture, a texture briefly presented to the opposite eye suppressed the perception of the elements with the attended orientation, while the elements with the orientation which was ignored sustained their dominance. Moreover, subsequent experiments indicated that the suppression depended on the orientation of the texture elements constituting the mask, but was independent of their locations. These results suggest that attention to specific features modulates interocular suppression in a mode which is different from that found in a previous study [Ooi and He, 1999 Perception28 551–574].
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlaisDBlakeR, 1999“Neural strength of visual attention gauged by motion adaptation”Nature Neuroscience21015–1018
2.
BonnehYSagiDKarniA, 2001“A transition between eye and object rivalry determined by stimulus coherence”Vision Research41981–989
ChaudhuriA, 1990“Modulation of the motion aftereffect by selective attention”Nature34460–62
5.
ChelazziLMillerE KDuncanJDesimoneR, 1993“A neural basis for visual search in inferior temporal cortex”Nature363345–347
6.
GandhiS PHeegerD JBoyntonG M, 1999“Spatial attention affects brain activity in human primary visual cortex”Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA963314–3319
7.
KovácsIPapathomasTYangMFeherA, 1996“When the brain changes its mind: Interocular grouping during binocular rivalry”Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA9315508–15511
8.
KleinR M, 2000“Inhibition of return”Trends in Cognitive Sciences4138–147
9.
LeopoldD ALogothetisN K, 1996“Activity changes in early visual cortex reflect monkeys' percepts during binocular rivalry”Nature379549–553
10.
LogothetisN KSchallJ D, 1989“Neural correlates of subjective visual perception”Science245761–763
11.
LogothetisN KLeopoldD ASheinbergD L, 1996“What is rivaling during binocular rivalry?”Nature380621–624
12.
LouL, 1999“Selective peripheral fading: evidence for inhibitory sensory effect of attention”Perception28519–526
MooreC MEgethH, 1998“How does feature-based attention affect visual processing?”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance241296–1310
15.
MoranJDesimoneR, 1985“Selective attention gates visual processing in the extrastriate cortex”Science229782–784
16.
NguyenV AFreemanA WWenderothP, 2001“The depth and selectivity of suppression in binocular rivalry”Perception & Psychophysics63348–360
17.
O'CravenK MRosenB RKwongK KTreismanASavoyR L, 1997“Voluntary attention modulates fMRI activity in human MT-MST”Neuron18591–598
18.
OoiT LHeZ J, 1999“Binocular rivalry and visual awareness: the role of attention”Perception28551–574
19.
PolonskyABlakeRBraunJHeegerD J, 2000“Neural activity in human primary visual cortex correlates with perception during binocular rivalry”Nature Neuroscience31153–1159
20.
PosnerM ICohenY, 1984“Components of visual orienting”, in Attention and Performance X Eds BoumaHBouwhuisD G (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates) pp 531–556
SheinbergD LLogothetisN K, 1997“The role of temporal cortical areas in perceptual organization”Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA943408–3413
23.
ShihS-ISperlingG, 1996“Is there feature-based attentional selection in visual search?”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance22758–779
24.
ShulmanG L, 1991“Attentional modulation of mechanisms that analyze rotation in depth”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance17726–737
25.
SmithB B, 1961“An unexpected effect of attention in peripheral vision”Nature189776
26.
SomersD CDaleA MSeiffertA ETootellR B H, 1999“Functional MRI reveals spatially specific attentional modulation in human primary visual cortex”Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA961663–1668
27.
SpitzerHDesimoneRMoranJ, 1988“Increased attention enhances both behavioral and neuronal performance”Science240338–340
28.
TongFEngelS A, 2001“Interocular rivalry revealed in the human cortical blind-spot representation”Nature411195–199
29.
ToppinoT CLongG M, 1987“Selective adaptation with reversible figures: Don't change that channel”Perception & Psychophysics4237–48
30.
TreismanAGeladeG, 1980“A feature integration theory of attention”Cognitive Psychology1297–136
31.
TreismanASchmidtH, 1982“Illusory conjunctions in the perception of objects”Cognitive Psychology14107–141
32.
TreueSMaunsellJ H R, 1996“Attentional modulation of visual motion processing in cortical areas MT and MST”Nature382539–541
33.
TreueSTrujilloJ C M, 1999“Feature-based attention influences motion processing gain in macaque visual cortex”Nature399575–579
34.
WadeN J, 1973“Contour synchrony in binocular rivalry”Perception & Psychophysics13423–425
35.
WatanabeTSasakiYMiyauchiSPutzBFujimakiNNielsenMTakinoRMiyakawaS, 1998“Attention-regulated activity in human primary visual cortex”Journal of Neurophysiology792218–2221
36.
WolfeJ M, 1984“Reversing ocular dominance and suppression in a single flash”Vision Research24471–478
37.
YashurunYCarrascoM, 1999“Spatial attention improves performance in spatial resolution tasks”Vision Research39293–306
