Effects of retinal eccentricity and acuity on global-motion processing

Impaired stationarity perception is associated with increased virtual reality sickness

Stationarity perception refers to the ability to accurately perceive the surrounding visual environment as world-fixed during self-motion. Perception of stationarity depends on mechanisms that evaluate the congruence between retinal/oculomotor signals and head movement signals. In a series of psychophysical experiments, we systematically varied the congruence between retinal/oculomotor and head movement signals to find the range of visual gains that is compatible with perception of a stationary environment. On each trial, human subjects wearing a head-mounted display execute a yaw head movement and report whether the visual gain was perceived to be too slow or fast. A psychometric fit to the data across trials reveals the visual gain most compatible with stationarity (a measure of accuracy) and the sensitivity to visual gain manipulation (a measure of precision). Across experiments, we varied 1) the spatial frequency of the visual stimulus, 2) the retinal location of the visual stimulus (central vs. peripheral), and 3) fixation behavior (scene-fixed vs. head-fixed). Stationarity perception is most precise and accurate during scene-fixed fixation. Effects of spatial frequency and retinal stimulus location become evident during head-fixed fixation, when retinal image motion is increased. Virtual Reality sickness assessed using the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire covaries with perceptual performance. Decreased accuracy is associated with an increase in the nausea subscore, while decreased precision is associated with an increase in the oculomotor and disorientation subscores.

Perspective Cues Make Eye-specific Contributions to 3-D Motion Perception

Robust 3-D visual perception is achieved by integrating stereoscopic and perspective cues. The canonical model describing the integration of these cues assumes that perspective signals sensed by the left and right eyes are indiscriminately pooled into a single representation that contributes to perception. Here, we show that this model fails to account for 3-D motion perception. We measured the sensitivity of male macaque monkeys to 3-D motion signaled by left-eye perspective cues, right-eye perspective cues, stereoscopic cues, and all three cues combined. The monkeys exhibited idiosyncratic differences in their biases and sensitivities for each cue, including left- and right-eye perspective cues, suggesting that the signals undergo at least partially separate neural processing. Importantly, sensitivity to combined cue stimuli was greater than predicted by the canonical model, which previous studies found to account for the perception of 3-D orientation in both humans and monkeys. Instead, 3-D motion sensitivity was best explained by a model in which stereoscopic cues were integrated with left- and right-eye perspective cues whose representations were at least partially independent. These results indicate that the integration of perspective and stereoscopic cues is a shared computational strategy across 3-D processing domains. However, they also reveal a fundamental difference in how left- and right-eye perspective signals are represented for 3-D orientation versus motion perception. This difference results in more effective use of available sensory information in the processing of 3-D motion than orientation and may reflect the temporal urgency of avoiding and intercepting moving objects.

Action Recognition in a Crowded Environment

So far, action recognition has been mainly examined with small point-light human stimuli presented alone within a narrow central area of the observer's visual field. Yet, we need to recognize the actions of life-size humans viewed alone or surrounded by bystanders, whether they are seen in central or peripheral vision. Here, we examined the mechanisms in central vision and far periphery (40° eccentricity) involved in the recognition of the actions of a life-size actor (target) and their sensitivity to the presence of a crowd surrounding the target. In Experiment 1, we used an action adaptation paradigm to probe whether static or idly moving crowds might interfere with the recognition of a target's action (hug or clap). We found that this type of crowds whose movements were dissimilar to the target action hardly affected action recognition in central and peripheral vision. In Experiment 2, we examined whether crowd actions that were more similar to the target actions affected action recognition. Indeed, the presence of that crowd diminished adaptation aftereffects in central vision as wells as in the periphery. We replicated Experiment 2 using a recognition task instead of an adaptation paradigm. With this task, we found evidence of decreased action recognition accuracy, but this was significant in peripheral vision only. Our results suggest that the presence of a crowd carrying out actions similar to that of the target affects its recognition. We outline how these results can be understood in terms of high-level crowding effects that operate on action-sensitive perceptual channels.

Is theta burst stimulation applied to visual cortex able to modulate peripheral visual acuity?

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation is usually applied to visual cortex to explore the effects on cortical excitability. Most researchers therefore concentrate on changes of phosphene threshold, rarely on consequences for visual performance. Thus, we investigated peripheral visual acuity in the four quadrants of the visual field using Landolt C optotypes before and after repetitive stimulation of the visual cortex. We applied continuous and intermittend theta burst stimulation with various stimulation intensities (60%, 80%, 100%, 120% of individual phosphene threshold) as well as monophasic and biphasic 1 Hz stimulation, respectively. As an important result, no serious adverse effects were observed. In particular, no seizure was induced, even with theta burst stimulation applied with 120% of individual phosphene threshold. In only one case stimulation was ceased because the subject reported intolerable pain. Baseline visual acuity decreased over sessions, indicating a continuous training effect. Unexpectedly, none of the applied transcranial magnetic stimulation protocols had an effect on performance: no change in visual acuity was found in any of the four quadrants of the visual field. Binocular viewing as well as the use of peripheral instead of foveal presentation of the stimuli might have contributed to this result. Furthermore, intraindividual variability could have masked the TMS- induced effects on visual acuity.