Temporal enhancement of cross-adaptation between density and size perception based on the theory of magnitude

How is visual separation assessed? By counting distance units

How does the human visual system assess the separation between pairs of stimuli in a frontal plane? According to the direct (or subtractive) view the system finds the difference between the positions of the stimuli in a localization system. According to the indirect (or additive) view the system finds the number of instances of a distance unit lying between representations of the stimuli. Critically, position is explicitly represented under the direct view, with separation being derived from position. Position is not explicitly represented under the indirect view; separation is consequently inferred by counting an internal unit of distance. Recent results favor the indirect over the direct view of separation assessment. Dissociations between assessments of separation and position, various context effects in the assessment of separation, and suggestions that position information is not cleanly accessed argue against the direct view. At the same time, various context effects in separation assessment argue for the indirect view. Recent findings regarding the brain bases of vision are consistent with the indirect view. In short, recent results suggest that assessing the separation between two frontal stimuli involves integrating distance units between representations of the stimuli.

The spatial properties of adaptation-induced distance compression

Exposure to a dynamic texture reduces the perceived separation between objects, altering the mapping between physical relations in the environment and their neural representations. Here we investigated the spatial tuning and spatial frame of reference of this aftereffect to understand the stage(s) of processing where adaptation-induced changes occur. In Experiment 1, we measured apparent separation at different positions relative to the adapted area, revealing a strong but tightly tuned compression effect. We next tested the spatial frame of reference of the effect, either by introducing a gaze shift between adaptation and test phase (Experiment 2) or by decoupling the spatial selectivity of adaptation in retinotopic and world-centered coordinates (Experiment 3). Results across the two experiments indicated that both retinotopic and world-centered adaptation effects can occur independently. Spatial attention to the location of the adaptor alone could not account for the world-centered transfer we observed, and retinotopic adaptation did not transfer to world-centered coordinates after a saccade (Experiment 4). Finally, we found that aftereffects in different reference frames have a similar, narrow spatial tuning profile (Experiment 5). Together, our results suggest that the neural representation of local separation resides early in the visual cortex, but it can also be modulated by activity in higher visual areas.