On the role of attention in binocular rivalry: electrophysiological evidence.

During binocular rivalry visual consciousness fluctuates between two dissimilar monocular images. We investigated the role of attention in this phenomenon by comparing event-related potentials (ERPs) when binocular-rivalry stimuli were attended with when they were unattended. Stimuli were dichoptic,...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Urte Roeber, Sandra Veser, Erich Schröger, Robert P O'Shea
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2011-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3142186?pdf=render
id doaj-2989871f33904f8c8e5d3eb2d9c46278
record_format Article
spelling doaj-2989871f33904f8c8e5d3eb2d9c462782020-11-24T22:03:07ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032011-01-0167e2261210.1371/journal.pone.0022612On the role of attention in binocular rivalry: electrophysiological evidence.Urte RoeberSandra VeserErich SchrögerRobert P O'SheaDuring binocular rivalry visual consciousness fluctuates between two dissimilar monocular images. We investigated the role of attention in this phenomenon by comparing event-related potentials (ERPs) when binocular-rivalry stimuli were attended with when they were unattended. Stimuli were dichoptic, orthogonal gratings that yielded binocular rivalry and dioptic, identically oriented gratings that yielded binocular fusion. Events were all possible orthogonal changes in orientation of one or both gratings. We had two attention conditions: In the attend-to-grating condition, participants had to report changes in perceived orientation, focussing their attention on the gratings. In the attend-to-fixation condition participants had to report changes in a central fixation target, taking attention away from the gratings. We found, surprisingly, that attending to rival gratings yielded a smaller ERP component (the N1, from 160-210 ms) than attending to the fixation target. To explain this paradoxical effect of attention, we propose that rivalry occurs in the attend-to-fixation condition (we found an ERP signature of rivalry in the form of a sustained negativity from 210-300 ms) but that the mechanism processing the stimulus changes is more adapted in the attend-to-grating condition than in the attend-to-fixation condition. This is consistent with the theory that adaptation gives rise to changes of visual consciousness during binocular rivalry.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3142186?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Urte Roeber
Sandra Veser
Erich Schröger
Robert P O'Shea
spellingShingle Urte Roeber
Sandra Veser
Erich Schröger
Robert P O'Shea
On the role of attention in binocular rivalry: electrophysiological evidence.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Urte Roeber
Sandra Veser
Erich Schröger
Robert P O'Shea
author_sort Urte Roeber
title On the role of attention in binocular rivalry: electrophysiological evidence.
title_short On the role of attention in binocular rivalry: electrophysiological evidence.
title_full On the role of attention in binocular rivalry: electrophysiological evidence.
title_fullStr On the role of attention in binocular rivalry: electrophysiological evidence.
title_full_unstemmed On the role of attention in binocular rivalry: electrophysiological evidence.
title_sort on the role of attention in binocular rivalry: electrophysiological evidence.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2011-01-01
description During binocular rivalry visual consciousness fluctuates between two dissimilar monocular images. We investigated the role of attention in this phenomenon by comparing event-related potentials (ERPs) when binocular-rivalry stimuli were attended with when they were unattended. Stimuli were dichoptic, orthogonal gratings that yielded binocular rivalry and dioptic, identically oriented gratings that yielded binocular fusion. Events were all possible orthogonal changes in orientation of one or both gratings. We had two attention conditions: In the attend-to-grating condition, participants had to report changes in perceived orientation, focussing their attention on the gratings. In the attend-to-fixation condition participants had to report changes in a central fixation target, taking attention away from the gratings. We found, surprisingly, that attending to rival gratings yielded a smaller ERP component (the N1, from 160-210 ms) than attending to the fixation target. To explain this paradoxical effect of attention, we propose that rivalry occurs in the attend-to-fixation condition (we found an ERP signature of rivalry in the form of a sustained negativity from 210-300 ms) but that the mechanism processing the stimulus changes is more adapted in the attend-to-grating condition than in the attend-to-fixation condition. This is consistent with the theory that adaptation gives rise to changes of visual consciousness during binocular rivalry.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3142186?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT urteroeber ontheroleofattentioninbinocularrivalryelectrophysiologicalevidence
AT sandraveser ontheroleofattentioninbinocularrivalryelectrophysiologicalevidence
AT erichschroger ontheroleofattentioninbinocularrivalryelectrophysiologicalevidence
AT robertposhea ontheroleofattentioninbinocularrivalryelectrophysiologicalevidence
_version_ 1725833135649718272