Evidence for a retinal velocity memory underlying the direction of anticipatory smooth pursuit eye movements

Effector-dependent stochastic reference frame transformations alter decision-making

Psychophysical, motor control, and modeling studies have revealed that sensorimotor reference frame transformations (RFTs) add variability to transformed signals. For perceptual decision-making, this phenomenon could decrease the fidelity of a decision signal's representation or alternatively improve its processing through stochastic facilitation. We investigated these two hypotheses under various sensorimotor RFT constraints. Participants performed a time-limited, forced-choice motion discrimination task under eight combinations of head roll and/or stimulus rotation while responding either with a saccade or button press. This paradigm, together with the use of a decision model, allowed us to parameterize and correlate perceptual decision behavior with eye-, head-, and shoulder-centered sensory and motor reference frames. Misalignments between sensory and motor reference frames produced systematic changes in reaction time and response accuracy. For some conditions, these changes were consistent with a degradation of motion evidence commensurate with a decrease in stimulus strength in our model framework. Differences in participant performance were explained by a continuum of eye–head–shoulder representations of accumulated motion evidence, with an eye-centered bias during saccades and a shoulder-centered bias during button presses. In addition, we observed evidence for stochastic facilitation during head-rolled conditions (i.e., head roll resulted in faster, more accurate decisions in oblique motion for a given stimulus–response misalignment). We show that perceptual decision-making and stochastic RFTs are inseparable within the present context. We show that by simply rolling one's head, perceptual decision-making is altered in a way that is predicted by stochastic RFTs.

Retinal error signals and fluctuations in eye velocity influence oculomotor behavior in subsequent trials

The oculomotor system makes use of an integration of previous stimulus velocities (the prior) and current sensory inputs to adjust initial eye speeds. The present study extended this research by investigating the roles of different retinal or extra-retinal signals for this process. To test for this, participants viewed movement sequences that all ended with the same test trial. Earlier in the sequence, the prior was manipulated by presenting targets that either had different velocities, different starting positions, or target movements designed to elicit differential oculomotor behavior (tracked with or without additional corrective saccades). Additionally, these prior targets could vary in terms of contrast to manipulate reliability. When the velocity of prior trials differed from test trials, the reliability-weighted integration of prior information was replicated. When the prior trials differed in starting position, significant effects on subsequent oculomotor behavior were only observed for the reliable target. Although there were also differences in eye velocity across the different manipulations, they could not explain the observed reliability-weighted integration. When comparing the same physical prior trials but tracked with additional corrective saccades, the eye velocity in the test trial also differed systematically (slower for forward saccades, and faster for backward saccades). The direction of the observed effect contradicts the expectations based on perceived speed and eye velocity, but can be predicted by a combination of retinal velocity and position error signals. Together, these results suggest that general fluctuations in eye velocity as well as retinal error signals are related to oculomotor behavior in subsequent trials.

On the relation between anticipatory ocular torsion and anticipatory smooth pursuit

Humans and other animals move their eyes in anticipation to compensate for sensorimotor delays. Such anticipatory eye movements can be driven by the expectation of a future visual object or event. Here we investigate whether such anticipatory responses extend to ocular torsion, the eyes’ rotation about the line of sight. We recorded three-dimensional eye position in head-fixed healthy human adults who tracked a rotating dot pattern moving horizontally across a computer screen. This kind of stimulus triggers smooth pursuit with a horizontal and torsional component. In three experiments, we elicited expectation of stimulus rotation by repeatedly showing the same rotation (Experiment 1), or by using different types of higher-level symbolic cues indicating the rotation of the upcoming target (Experiments 2 and 3). Across all experiments, results reveal reliable anticipatory horizontal smooth pursuit. However, anticipatory torsion was only elicited by stimulus repetition, but not by symbolic cues. In summary, torsion can be made in anticipation of an upcoming visual event only when low-level motion signals are accumulated by repetition. Higher-level cognitive mechanisms related to a symbolic cue reliably evoke anticipatory pursuit but did not modulate torsion. These findings indicate that anticipatory torsion and anticipatory pursuit are at least partly decoupled and might be controlled separately.

Saccade-induced changes in ocular torsion reveal predictive orientation perception

Natural orienting of gaze often results in a retinal image that is rotated relative to space due to ocular torsion. However, we perceive neither this rotation nor a moving world despite visual rotational motion on the retina. This perceptual stability is often attributed to the phenomenon known as predictive remapping, but the current remapping literature ignores this torsional component. In addition, studies often simply measure remapping across either space or features (e.g., orientation) but in natural circumstances, both components are bound together for stable perception. One natural circumstance in which the perceptual system must account for the current and future eye orientation to correctly interpret the orientation of external stimuli occurs during movements to or from oblique eye orientations (i.e., eye orientations with both a horizontal and vertical angular component relative to the primary position). Here we took advantage of oblique eye orientation-induced ocular torsion to examine perisaccadic orientation perception. First, we found that orientation perception was largely predicted by the rotated retinal image. Second, we observed a presaccadic remapping of orientation perception consistent with maintaining a stable (but spatially inaccurate) retinocentric perception throughout the saccade. These findings strongly suggest that our seamless perceptual stability relies on retinocentric signals that are predictively remapped in all three ocular dimensions with each saccade.

Misperception of motion in depth originates from an incomplete transformation of retinal signals

Depth perception requires the use of an internal model of the eye-head geometry to infer distance from binocular retinal images and extraretinal 3D eye-head information, particularly ocular vergence. Similarly, for motion in depth perception, gaze angle is required to correctly interpret the spatial direction of motion from retinal images; however, it is unknown whether the brain can make adequate use of extraretinal version and vergence information to correctly transform binocular retinal motion into 3D spatial coordinates. Here we tested this hypothesis by asking participants to reconstruct the spatial trajectory of an isolated disparity stimulus moving in depth either peri-foveally or peripherally while participants' gaze was oriented at different vergence and version angles. We found large systematic errors in the perceived motion trajectory that reflected an intermediate reference frame between a purely retinal interpretation of binocular retinal motion (not accounting for veridical vergence and version) and the spatially correct motion. We quantify these errors with a 3D reference frame model accounting for target, eye, and head position upon motion percept encoding. This model could capture the behavior well, revealing that participants tended to underestimate their version by up to 17%, overestimate their vergence by up to 22%, and underestimate the overall change in retinal disparity by up to 64%, and that the use of extraretinal information depended on retinal eccentricity. Since such large perceptual errors are not observed in everyday viewing, we suggest that both monocular retinal cues and binocular extraretinal signals are required for accurate real-world motion in depth perception.

Computations underlying the visuomotor transformation for smooth pursuit eye movements

Smooth pursuit eye movements are driven by retinal motion and enable us to view moving targets with high acuity. Complicating the generation of these movements is the fact that different eye and head rotations can produce different retinal stimuli but giving rise to identical smooth pursuit trajectories. However, because our eyes accurately pursue targets regardless of eye and head orientation (Blohm G, Lefèvre P. J Neurophysiol 104: 2103-2115, 2010), the brain must somehow take these signals into account. To learn about the neural mechanisms potentially underlying this visual-to-motor transformation, we trained a physiologically inspired neural network model to combine two-dimensional (2D) retinal motion signals with three-dimensional (3D) eye and head orientation and velocity signals to generate a spatially correct 3D pursuit command. We then simulated conditions of 1) head roll-induced ocular counterroll, 2) oblique gaze-induced retinal rotations, 3) eccentric gazes (invoking the half-angle rule), and 4) optokinetic nystagmus to investigate how units in the intermediate layers of the network accounted for different 3D constraints. Simultaneously, we simulated electrophysiological recordings (visual and motor tunings) and microstimulation experiments to quantify the reference frames of signals at each processing stage. We found a gradual retinal-to-intermediate-to-spatial feedforward transformation through the hidden layers. Our model is the first to describe the general 3D transformation for smooth pursuit mediated by eye- and head-dependent gain modulation. Based on several testable experimental predictions, our model provides a mechanism by which the brain could perform the 3D visuomotor transformation for smooth pursuit.