Sensory sluggishness dissociates saccadic, manual, and perceptual responses: An S-cone study

Sensory information travels to visual and motor areas via several distinct pathways, some of them being fastVlike the achromatic magnocellular and retinotectal routesVand others slowerVthose carrying chromatic signals, in particular S-opponent signals. It is debated whether common visual processing stages are used for different types of responses, such as initiating saccadic or manual responses or making perceptual judgments. The present paper casts new light on this question by comparing the participation of fast and slow pathways across these responses. In the first experiment, we measured manual and saccadic reaction times to luminance and S-cone signals, equated in detectability for each participant and presented on either sides of fixation. Our results show that both manual and saccadic responses are slower for S-cone stimuli. Most interestingly, this reaction time difference was twice as large for saccadic responses as for manual responses, suggesting that saccades rely more on the fast signals, not supported by S-cone stimuli, than do manual responses. In a second experiment, our participants performed temporal order judgments on pairs of luminance and S-cone stimuli. Our results show no evidence of perceived time discrepancy between the two signals, which may imply that perceptual judgments utilize different signals from either manual or saccadic responses

The effect of eye movements and blinks on afterimage appearance and duration

The question of whether eye movements influence afterimage perception has been asked since the 18th century, and yet there is surprisingly little consensus on how robust these effects are and why they occur. The number of historical theories aiming to explain the effects are more numerous than clear experimental demonstrations of such effects. We provide a clearer characterization of when eye movements and blinks do or do not affect afterimages with the aim to distinguish between historical theories and integrate them with a modern understanding of perception. We found neither saccades nor pursuit reduced strong afterimage duration, and blinks actually increased afterimage duration when tested in the light. However, for weak afterimages, we found saccades reduced duration, and blinks and pursuit eye movements did not. One interpretation of these results is that saccades diminish afterimage perception because they cause the afterimage to move unlike a real object. Furthermore, because saccades affect weak afterimages but not strong ones, we suggest that their effect is modulated by the ambiguity of the afterimage signal

Saccadic inhibition reveals the timing of automatic and voluntary signals in the human brain

Neurophysiological and phenomenological data on sensorimotor decision making are growing so rapidly that it is now necessary and achievable to capture it in biologically inspired models, for advancing our understanding in both research and clinical settings. However, the main impediment in moving from elegant models with few free parameters to more complex biological models in humans lies in constraining the more numerous parameters with behavioral data (without human single-cell recording). Here we show that a behavioral effect called “saccadic inhibition” (1) is predicted by existing complex (neuronal field) models, (2) constrains crucial temporal parameters of the model, precisely enough to address individual differences, and (3) is not accounted for by current simple decision models, even after significant additions. Visual onsets appearing while an observer plans a saccade knock out a subpopulation of saccadic latencies that would otherwise occur, producing a clear dip in the latency distribution. This overlooked phenomenon is remarkably well time locked across conditions and observers, revealing and characterizing a fast automatic component of visual input to oculomotor competition. The neural field model not only captures this but predicts additional features that are borne out: the dips show spatial specificity, are lawfully modulated in contrast, and occur with S-cone stimuli invisible to the retinotectal route. Overall, we provide a way forward for applying precise neurophysiological models of saccade planning in humans at the individual level

The effect of eye movements and blinks on afterimage appearance and duration

The question of whether eye movements influence afterimage perception has been asked since the 18th century, and yet there is surprisingly little consensus on how robust these effects are and why they occur. The number of historical theories aiming to explain the effects are more numerous than clear experimental demonstrations of such effects. We provide a clearer characterization of when eye movements and blinks do or do not affect afterimages with the aim to distinguish between historical theories and integrate them with a modern understanding of perception. We found neither saccades nor pursuit reduced strong afterimage duration, and blinks actually increased afterimage duration when tested in the light. However, for weak afterimages, we found saccades reduced duration, and blinks and pursuit eye movements did not. One interpretation of these results is that saccades diminish afterimage perception because they cause the afterimage to move unlike a real object. Furthermore, because saccades affect weak afterimages but not strong ones, we suggest that their effect is modulated by the ambiguity of the afterimage signal

Interaction between contours and eye movements in the perception of afterimages: A test of the signal ambiguity theory

An intriguing property of afterimages is that conscious experience can be strong, weak, or absent following identical stimulus adaptation. Previously we suggested that postadaptation retinal signals are inherently ambiguous, and therefore the perception they evoke is strongly influenced by cues that increase or decrease the likelihood that they represent real objects (the signal ambiguity theory). Here we provide a more definitive test of this theory using two cues previously found to influence afterimage perception in opposite ways and plausibly at separate loci of action. However, by manipulating both cues simultaneously, we found that their effects interacted, consistent with the idea that they affect the same process of object interpretation rather than being independent influences. These findings bring contextual influences on afterimages into more general theories of cue combination, and we suggest that afterimage perception should be considered alongside other areas of vision science where cues are found to interact in their influence on perception

Cognitive control and automatic interference in mind and brain: A unified model of saccadic inhibition and countermanding

Countermanding behavior has long been seen as a cornerstone of executive control—the human ability to selectively inhibit undesirable responses and change plans. However, scattered evidence implies that stopping behavior is entangled with simpler automatic stimulus-response mechanisms. Here we operationalize this idea by merging the latest conceptualization of saccadic countermanding with a neural network model of visuo-oculomotor behavior that integrates bottom-up and top-down drives. This model accounts for all fundamental qualitative and quantitative features of saccadic countermanding, including neuronal activity. Importantly, it does so by using the same architecture and parameters as basic visually guided behavior and automatic stimulus-driven interference. Using simulations and new data, we compare the temporal dynamics of saccade countermanding with that of saccadic inhibition (SI), a hallmark effect thought to reflect automatic competition within saccade planning areas. We demonstrate how SI accounts for a large proportion of the saccade countermanding process when using visual signals. We conclude that top-down inhibition acts later, piggy-backing on the quicker automatic inhibition. This conceptualization fully accounts for the known effects of signal features and response modalities traditionally used across the countermanding literature. Moreover, it casts different light on the concept of top-down inhibition, its timing and neural underpinning, as well as the interpretation of stop-signal reaction time (RT), the main behavioral measure in the countermanding literature

Strategy and Processing Speed Eclipse Individual Differences in Control Ability in Conflict Tasks

Response control or inhibition is one of the cornerstones of modern cognitive psychology, featuring prominently in theories of executive functioning and impulsive behavior. However, repeated failures to observe correlations between commonly applied tasks have led some theorists to question whether common response conflict processes even exist. A challenge to answering this question is that behavior is multifaceted, with both conflict and nonconflict processes (e.g., strategy, processing speed) contributing to individual differences. Here, we use a cognitive model to dissociate these processes; the diffusion model for conflict tasks (Ulrich et al., 2015). In a meta-analysis of fits to seven empirical datasets containing combinations of the flanker, Simon, color-word Stroop, and spatial Stroop tasks, we observed weak ( r < .05) zero-order correlations between tasks in parameters reflecting conflict processing, seemingly challenging a general control construct. However, our meta-analysis showed consistent positive correlations in parameters representing processing speed and strategy. We then use model simulations to evaluate whether correlations in behavioral costs are diagnostic of the presence or absence of common mechanisms of conflict processing. We use the model to impose known correlations for conflict mechanisms across tasks, and we compare the simulated behavior to simulations when there is no conflict correlation across tasks. We find that correlations in strategy and processing speed can produce behavioral correlations equal to, or larger than, those produced by correlated conflict mechanisms. We conclude that correlations between conflict tasks are only weakly informative about common conflict mechanisms if researchers do not control for strategy and processing speed

The validity and consistency of continuous joystick response in perceptual decision-making

A computer joystick is an efficient and cost-effective response device for recording continuous movements in psychological experiments. Movement trajectories and other measures from continuous responses have expanded the insights gained from discrete responses (e.g., button presses) by providing unique information about how cognitive processes unfold over time. However, few studies have evaluated the validity of joystick responses with reference to conventional key presses, and how response modality can affect cognitive processes. Here we systematically compared human participants’ behavioral performance of perceptual decision-making when they responded with either joystick movements or key presses in a four-alternative motion discrimination task. We found evidence that the response modality did not affect raw behavioral measures, including decision accuracy and mean response time, at the group level. Furthermore, to compare the underlying decision processes between the two response modalities, we fitted a drift-diffusion model of decision-making to individual participants’ behavioral data. Bayesian analyses of the model parameters showed no evidence that switching from key presses to continuous joystick movements modulated the decision-making process. These results supported continuous joystick actions as a valid apparatus for continuous movements, although we highlight the need for caution when conducting experiments with continuous movement responses

Distraction for the eye and ear

The ways that extraneous visual and auditory stimuli impair human performance are reviewed with aim of distinguishing those sensory, perceptual and cognitive effects relevant to the design of human-machine systems. Although commonly regarded as disruptive, distractions reflect the adaptability of the organism to changing circumstances. Depending on the context, our knowledge of the ways in which distraction works can be exploited in the form of alarms or other attention-getting devices, or resisted by changing the physical and psychological properties of the stimuli. The research described here draws from contemporary research on distraction. The review underscores the vulnerability of performance even from stimuli of modest magnitude while acknowledging that distraction is a necessary consequence of our adaptive brain that leads to effects that are (and sometimes, but not always) beneficial to safety, efficiency and wellbeing. Low intensity distractors are particularly sensitive to the context in which they occur. The mechanisms outlined can be exploited either to grab attention (and even temporarily disable the individual, but more usefully to warn or redirect the individual) or to modify it in subtle ways across the gamut of human activity