Search

How our perceptual experience of the world remains stable and continuous despite the frequent repositioning eye movements remains very much a mystery. One possibility is that our brain actively constructs a spatiotopic representation of the world, which is anchored in external—or at least head-centred—coordinates. In this study, we show that the positional motion aftereffect (the change in apparent position after adaptation to motion) is spatially selective in external rather than retinal coordinates, whereas the classic motion aftereffect (the illusion of motion after prolonged inspection of a moving source) is selective in retinotopic coordinates. The results provide clear evidence for a spatiotopic map in humans: one which can be influenced by image motion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The simultaneity of signals from different senses—such as vision and audition—is a useful cue for determining whether those signals arose from one environmental source or from more than one. To understand better the sensory mechanisms for assessing simultaneity, we measured the discrimination thresholds for time intervals marked by auditory, visual or auditory–visual stimuli, as a function of the base interval. For all conditions, both unimodal and cross-modal, the thresholds followed a characteristic ‘dipper function’ in which the lowest thresholds occurred when discriminating against a non-zero interval. The base interval yielding the lowest threshold was roughly equal to the threshold for discriminating asynchronous from synchronous presentations. Those lowest thresholds occurred at approximately 5, 15 and 75 ms for auditory, visual and auditory–visual stimuli, respectively. Thus, the mechanisms mediating performance with cross-modal stimuli are considerably slower than the mechanisms mediating performance within a particular sense. We developed a simple model with temporal filters of different time constants and showed that the model produces discrimination functions similar to the ones we observed in humans. Both for processing within a single sense, and for processing across senses, temporal perception is affected by the properties of temporal filters, the outputs of which are used to estimate time offsets, correlations between signals, and more. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Current models of attention, typically claim that vision and audition are limited by a common attentional resource which means that visual performance should be adversely affected by a concurrent auditory task and vice versa. Here, we test this implication by measuring auditory (pitch) and visual (contrast) thresholds in conjunction with cross-modal secondary tasks and find that no such interference occurs. Visual contrast discrimination thresholds were unaffected by a concurrent chord or pitch discrimination, and pitch-discrimination thresholds were virtually unaffected by a concurrent visual search or contrast discrimination task. However, if the dual tasks were presented within the same modality, thresholds were raised by a factor of between two (for visual discrimination) and four (for auditory discrimination). These results suggest that at least for low-level tasks such as discriminations of pitch and contrast, each sensory modality is under separate attentional control, rather than being limited by a supramodal attentional resource. This has implications for current theories of attention as well as for the use of multi-sensory media for efficient informational transmission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The role of symmetry detection in early visual processing and the sensitivity of biological visual systems to symmetry across a wide range of organisms suggest that symmetry can be detected by low-level visual mechanisms. However, computational and functional considerations suggest that higher-level mechanisms may also play a role in facial symmetry detection. We tested this hypothesis by examining whether symmetry detection is better for faces than comparable patterns, which share low-level properties with faces. Symmetry detection was better for upright faces than for inverted faces (experiment 1) and contrast-reversed faces (experiment 2), implicating high-level mechanisms in facial symmetry detection. In addition, facial symmetry detection was sensitive to spatial scale, unlike low-level symmetry detection mechanisms (experiment 3), and showed greater sensitivity to a 45° deviation from vertical than is found for other aspects of face perception (experiment 4). These results implicate specialized, higher-level mechanisms in the detection of facial symmetry. This specialization may reflect perceptual learning resulting from extensive experience detecting symmetry in faces or evolutionary selection pressures associated with the important role of facial symmetry in mate choice and ‘mind-reading’ or both. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Symmetry detection is important for many biological visual systems, including those of mammals, insects and birds. We constructed a symmetry-detection algorithm with two stages: location of the visually salient features of the image, then evaluating the symmetry of these features over a long range, by means of a simple Gaussian filter. The algorithm detects the axis of maximum symmetry for human faces (or any arbitrary image) and calculates the magnitude of the asymmetry. We have evaluated the algorithm on the dataset of Rhodes et al. (1998 Psychonom. Bull. Rev. 5, 659-669) and found that the algorithm is able to discriminate small variations of symmetry created by computer-manipulating the symmetry levels in individual faces, and that the values measured by the algorithm correlate well with human psycho-physical symmetry ratings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]