Top-Down Influences to Multistable Perception: Evidence from Temporal Dynamics

Authors: Daria N. Podvigina, Tatiana V. Chernigovskaya

Abstract:

We have studied the temporal characteristics of bistable perception of the stimuli of two types: one involves alterations in a perceived depth and another one has an ambiguous content. We used the Necker lattice and lines of shadowed circles ambiguously perceived either as spheres or holes as stimuli of the first type. The Winson figure (the Eskimo/Indian picture) was a stimulus of the second type. We have analyzed how often the reversals occurred (reversal rate) and for how long each of the two interpretations, or percepts, was observed during one presentation (stability durations). For all three ambiguous images the reversal rate and the stability durations had similar values, which provide another evidence for a significant role of top-down processes in multistable perception.

Keywords: Multistable perception, perceived depth, reversal rate, top-down processes.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1110349

References:

[1] J. Kornmeier, and M. Bach, “Ambiguous figures – what happens in the brain when perception changes but not the stimulus,” Front. Hum. Neurosci., 2012, vol. 6, pp, 1-23.
[2] T.C. Toppino, and G.M. Long, “Selective adaptation with reversible figures: don’t change that channel”, Percept Psychophys., 1987, vol. 42, pp. 37–48.
[3] G.M. Long, and A.D. Olszweski, “To reverse or not to reverse: when is an ambiguous figure not ambiguous?”, Am J Psychol., 1999, vol. 112, pp. 41–71.
[4] J. Kornmeier, and M. Bach, “Early neural activity in Necker-cube reversal: evidence for low-level processing of a gestalt phenomenon”, Psychophysiology, 2004, vol. 41, iss. 1, pp. 1-8.
[5] I. Rock, S. Hall, and J. Davis, “Why do ambiguous figures reverse,” Acta Psychologica, 1994, vol. 87, iss. 1, pp. 33–59.
[6] D.A. Leiopold, and N.K. Logothetis, “Multistable phenomena: changing views in perception,” Trends Cogn. Sci., 1999, vol. 3, iss. 7, 1 July, pp. 254–264.
[7] J. Kornmeier, Ch.M. Hein, and M.Bach, “Multistable perception: When bottom-up and top-down coincide,” Brain and Cognition, 2009, vol. 69, pp. 138-147.
[8] R. van Ee, L.C.J. van Dam, G.J. Brouwer, “Voluntary control and the dynamics of perceptual bi-stability”, Vis Res, 2005, vol 45, pp. 41-55.
[9] J. Kornmeier, S.P. Heinrich, H. Atmanspacher, and M. Bach, “The reversing "Necker Wall" - a new paradigm with reversal entrainment reveals an early EEG correlate,” Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, 2001, vol. 42, p. 409.
[10] J.E. Bergum, B.O. Bergum, “Self-perceived creativity and ambiguous figure reversal-rates”, Bull Psychonom Soc, 1979, vol. 14, no 5, pp. 373- 374.
[11] B.O. Bergum, J.E. Bergum, “Creativity, perceptual stability, and selfperception”, Bull Psychonom Soc, 1979, vol. 14, no 1, pp. 61–65.
[12] H. Klintman, “Original thinking and ambiguous figure reversal rates”, Bull Psychonom Soc, 1984, vol. 22, no 2, pp. 129–131.
[13] J. Wernery, “Bistable perception of the Necker cube in the context of cognition and personality”, ETH, 2013.
[14] N.F. Troje, and M. McAdam, “The viewing-from-above bias and the silhoutte illusion”, i-Perception, 2010, vol. 1, iss. 3, pp. 143–148.
[15] V.S. Ramachandran, “Perceiving Shape from Shading”, Sci. Amer., 1988, vol. 259. no 2, pp. 76-83.
[16] V.A. Maksimova, D.N. Podvigina, “Ambiguous figures perception under binocular and monocular viewing conditions”, Perception, 2014, vol 43, ECVP Abstract Supplement, p. 111.