Keep an eye on your hands: on the role of visual mechanisms in processing of haptic space

The present paper reviews research on a haptic orientation processing. Central is a task in which a test bar has to be set parallel to a reference bar at another location. Introducing a delay between inspecting the reference bar and setting the test bar leads to a surprising improvement. Moreover, offering visual background information also elevates performance. Interestingly, (congenitally) blind individuals do not or to a weaker extent show the improvement with time, while in parallel to this, they appear to benefit less from spatial imagery processing. Together this strongly points to an important role for visual processing mechanisms in the perception of haptic inputs

The haptic perception of spatial orientations

This review examines the isotropy of the perception of spatial orientations in the haptic system. It shows the existence of an oblique effect (i.e., a better perception of vertical and horizontal orientations than oblique orientations) in a spatial plane intrinsic to the haptic system, determined by the gravitational cues and the cognitive resources and defined in a subjective frame of reference. Similar results are observed from infancy to adulthood. In 3D space, the haptic processing of orientations is also anisotropic and seems to use both egocentric and allocentric cues. Taken together, these results revealed that the haptic oblique effect occurs when the sensory motor traces associated with exploratory movement are represented more abstractly at a cognitive level

A Computational Model of Visual Anisotropy

Visual anisotropy has been demonstrated in multiple tasks where performance differs between vertical, horizontal, and oblique orientations of the stimuli. We explain some principles of visual anisotropy by anisotropic smoothing, which is based on a variation on Koenderink's approach in [1]. We tested the theory by presenting Gaussian elongated luminance profiles and measuring the perceived orientations by means of an adjustment task. Our framework is based on the smoothing of the image with elliptical Gaussian kernels and it correctly predicted an illusory orientation bias towards the vertical axis. We discuss the scope of the theory in the context of other anisotropies in perception

The Influence of Perceptual Training on Working Memory in Older Adults

Normal aging is associated with a degradation of perceptual abilities and a decline in higher-level cognitive functions, notably working memory. To remediate age-related deficits, cognitive training programs are increasingly being developed. However, it is not yet definitively established if, and by what mechanisms, training ameliorates effects of cognitive aging. Furthermore, a major factor impeding the success of training programs is a frequent failure of training to transfer benefits to untrained abilities. Here, we offer the first evidence of direct transfer-of-benefits from perceptual discrimination training to working memory performance in older adults. Moreover, using electroencephalography to evaluate participants before and after training, we reveal neural evidence of functional plasticity in older adult brains, such that training-induced modifications in early visual processing during stimulus encoding predict working memory accuracy improvements. These findings demonstrate the strength of the perceptual discrimination training approach by offering clear psychophysical evidence of transfer-of-benefit and a neural mechanism underlying cognitive improvement

Visual Performance Fields: Frames of Reference

Performance in most visual discrimination tasks is better along the horizontal than the vertical meridian (Horizontal-Vertical Anisotropy, HVA), and along the lower than the upper vertical meridian (Vertical Meridian Asymmetry, VMA), with intermediate performance at intercardinal locations. As these inhomogeneities are prevalent throughout visual tasks, it is important to understand the perceptual consequences of dissociating spatial reference frames. In all studies of performance fields so far, allocentric environmental references and egocentric observer reference frames were aligned. Here we quantified the effects of manipulating head-centric and retinotopic coordinates on the shape of visual performance fields. When observers viewed briefly presented radial arrays of Gabors and discriminated the tilt of a target relative to homogeneously oriented distractors, performance fields shifted with head tilt (Experiment 1), and fixation (Experiment 2). These results show that performance fields shift in-line with egocentric referents, corresponding to the retinal location of the stimulus

The what and why of perceptual asymmetries in the visual domain

Perceptual asymmetry is one of the most important characteristics of our visual functioning. We carefully reviewed the scientific literature in order to examine such asymmetries, separating them into two major categories: within-visual field asymmetries and between-visual field asymmetries. We explain these asymmetries in terms of perceptual aspects or tasks, the what of the asymmetries; and in terms of underlying mechanisms, the why of the asymmetries. Tthe within-visual field asymmetries are fundamental to orientation, motion direction, and spatial frequency processing. between-visual field asymmetries have been reported for a wide range of perceptual phenomena. foveal dominance over the periphery, in particular, has been prominent for visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and colour discrimination. Tthis also holds true for object or face recognition and reading performance. upper-lower visual field asymmetries in favour of the lower have been demonstrated for temporal and contrast sensitivities, visual acuity, spatial resolution, orientation, hue and motion processing. Iin contrast, the upper field advantages have been seen in visual search, apparent size, and object recognition tasks. left-right visual field asymmetries include the left field dominance in spatial (e.g., orientation) processing and the right field dominance in non-spatial (e.g., temporal) processing. left field is also better at low spatial frequency or global and coordinate spatial processing, whereas the right field is better at high spatial frequency or local and categorical spatial processing. All these asymmetries have inborn neural/physiological origins, the primary why, but can be also susceptible to visual experience, the critical why (promotes or blocks the asymmetries by altering neural functions)