The Unconscious Eye: What Involuntary Eye Movements Reveal About Brain Processing
Altered grid-like coding in early blind people and the role of vision in conceptual navigation
Mind Perception and Behaviour: A Study of Quantitative and Qualitative Effects
Imagining and seeing: two faces of prosopagnosia
Sensory Consequences of Visual Actions
We use rapid eye, head, and body movements to extract information from a new part of the visual scene upon each new gaze fixation. But the consequences of such visual actions go beyond their intended sensory outcomes. On the one hand, intrinsic consequences accompany movement preparation as covert internal processes (e.g., predictive changes in the deployment of visual attention). On the other hand, visual actions have incidental consequences, side effects of moving the sensory surface to its intended goal (e.g., global motion of the retinal image during saccades). In this talk, I will present studies in which we investigated intrinsic and incidental sensory consequences of visual actions and their sensorimotor functions. Our results provide insights into continuously interacting top-down and bottom-up sensory processes, and they reify the necessity to study perception in connection to motor behavior that shapes its fundamental processes.
From following dots to understanding scenes
Real-world scene perception and search from foveal to peripheral vision
A high-resolution central fovea is a prominent design feature of human vision. But how important is the fovea for information processing and gaze guidance in everyday visual-cognitive tasks? Following on from classic findings for sentence reading, I will present key results from a series of eye-tracking experiments in which observers had to search for a target object within static or dynamic images of real-world scenes. Gaze-contingent scotomas were used to selectively deny information processing in the fovea, parafovea, or periphery. Overall, the results suggest that foveal vision is less important and peripheral vision is more important for scene perception and search than previously thought. The importance of foveal vision was found to depend on the specific requirements of the task. Moreover, the data support a central-peripheral dichotomy in which peripheral vision selects and central vision recognizes.
A neural mechanism for terminating decisions
The brain makes decisions by accumulating evidence until there is enough to stop and choose. Neural mechanisms of evidence accumulation are well established in association cortex, but the site and mechanism of termination is unknown. Here, we elucidate a mechanism for termination by neurons in the primate superior colliculus. We recorded simultaneously from neurons in lateral intraparietal cortex (LIP) and the superior colliculus (SC) while monkeys made perceptual decisions, reported by eye-movements. Single-trial analyses revealed distinct dynamics: LIP tracked the accumulation of evidence on each decision, and SC generated one burst at the end of the decision, occasionally preceded by smaller bursts. We hypothesized that the bursts manifest a threshold mechanism applied to LIP activity to terminate the decision. Focal inactivation of SC produced behavioral effects diagnostic of an impaired threshold sensor, requiring a stronger LIP signal to terminate a decision. The results reveal the transformation from deliberation to commitment.
The dynamics of temporal attention
Selection is the hallmark of attention: processing improves for attended items but is relatively impaired for unattended items. It is well known that visual spatial attention changes sensory signals and perception in this selective fashion. In the work I will present, we asked whether and how attentional selection happens across time. First, our experiments revealed that voluntary temporal attention (attention to specific points in time) is selective, resulting in perceptual tradeoffs across time. Second, we measured small eye movements called microsaccades and found that directing voluntary temporal attention increases the stability of the eyes in anticipation of an attended stimulus. Third, we developed a computational model of dynamic attention, which proposes specific mechanisms underlying temporal attention and its selectivity. Lastly, I will mention how we are testing predictions of the model with MEG. Altogether, this research shows how precisely timed voluntary attention helps manage inherent limits in visual processing across short time intervals, advancing our understanding of attention as a dynamic process.
Space and its computational challenges
How our senses work both separately and together involves rich computational problems. I will discuss the spatial and representational problems faced by the visual and auditory system, focusing on two issues. 1. How does the brain correct for discrepancies in the visual and auditory spatial reference frames? I will describe our recent discovery of a novel type of otoacoustic emission, the eye movement related eardrum oscillation, or EMREO (Gruters et al, PNAS 2018). 2. How does the brain encode more than one stimulus at a time? I will discuss evidence for neural time-division multiplexing, in which neural activity fluctuates across time to allow representations to encode more than one simultaneous stimulus (Caruso et al, Nat Comm 2018). These findings all emerged from experimentally testing computational models regarding spatial representations and their transformations within and across sensory pathways. Further, they speak to several general problems confronting modern neuroscience such as the hierarchical organization of brain pathways and limits on perceptual/cognitive processing.
The role of high- and low-level factors in smooth pursuit of predictable and random motions
Smooth pursuit eye movements are among our most intriguing motor behaviors. They are able to keep the line of sight on smoothly moving targets with little or no overt effort or deliberate planning, and they can respond quickly and accurately to changes in the trajectory of motion of targets. Nevertheless, despite these seeming automatic characteristics, pursuit is highly sensitive to high-level factors, such as the choices made about attention, or beliefs about the direction of upcoming motion. Investigators have struggled for decades with the problem of incorporating both high- and low-level processes into a single coherent model. This talk will present an overview of the current state of efforts to incorporate high- and low-level influences, as well as new observations that add to our understanding of both types of influences. These observations (in contrast to much of the literature) focus on the directional properties of pursuit. Studies will be presented that show: (1) the direction of smooth pursuit made to pursue fields of noisy random dots depends on the relative reliability of the sensory signal and the expected motion direction; (2) smooth pursuit shows predictive responses that depend on the interpretation of cues that signal an impending collision; and (3) smooth pursuit during a change in target direction displays kinematic properties consistent with the well-known two-thirds power law. Implications for incorporating high- and low-level factors into the same framework will be discussed.
The role of motion in localizing objects
Everything we see has a location. We know where things are before we know what they are. But how do we know where things are? Receptive fields in the visual system specify location but neural delays lead to serious errors whenever targets or eyes are moving. Motion may be the problem here but motion can also be the solution, correcting for the effects of delays and eye movements. To demonstrate this, I will present results from three motion illusions where perceived location differs radically from physical location. These help understand how and where position is coded. We first look at the effects of a target’s simple forward motion on its perceived location. Second, we look at perceived location of a target that has internal motion as well as forward motion. The two directions combine to produce an illusory path. This “double-drift” illusion strongly affects perceived position but, surprisingly, not eye movements or attention. Even more surprising, fMRI shows that the shifted percept does not emerge in the visual cortex but is seen instead in the frontal lobes. Finally, we report that a moving frame also shifts the perceived positions of dots flashed within it. Participants report the dot positions relative to the frame, as if the frame were not moving. These frame-induced position effects suggest a link to visual stability where we see a steady world despite massive displacements during saccades. These motion-based effects on perceived location lead to new insights concerning how and where position is coded in the brain.
What are you looking at? Adventures in human gaze behaviour
Neural mechanisms of active vision in the marmoset monkey
Human vision relies on rapid eye movements (saccades) 2-3 times every second to bring peripheral targets to central foveal vision for high resolution inspection. This rapid sampling of the world defines the perception-action cycle of natural vision and profoundly impacts our perception. Marmosets have similar visual processing and eye movements as humans, including a fovea that supports high-acuity central vision. Here, I present a novel approach developed in my laboratory for investigating the neural mechanisms of visual processing using naturalistic free viewing and simple target foraging paradigms. First, we establish that it is possible to map receptive fields in the marmoset with high precision in visual areas V1 and MT without constraints on fixation of the eyes. Instead, we use an off-line correction for eye position during foraging combined with high resolution eye tracking. This approach allows us to simultaneously map receptive fields, even at the precision of foveal V1 neurons, while also assessing the impact of eye movements on the visual information encoded. We find that the visual information encoded by neurons varies dramatically across the saccade to fixation cycle, with most information localized to brief post-saccadic transients. In a second study we examined if target selection prior to saccades can predictively influence how foveal visual information is subsequently processed in post-saccadic transients. Because every saccade brings a target to the fovea for detailed inspection, we hypothesized that predictive mechanisms might prime foveal populations to process the target. Using neural decoding from laminar arrays placed in foveal regions of area MT, we find that the direction of motion for a fixated target can be predictively read out from foveal activity even before its post-saccadic arrival. These findings highlight the dynamic and predictive nature of visual processing during eye movements and the utility of the marmoset as a model of active vision. Funding sources: NIH EY030998 to JM, Life Sciences Fellowship to JY
Understanding "why": The role of causality in cognition
Humans have a remarkable ability to figure out what happened and why. In this talk, I will shed light on this ability from multiple angles. I will present a computational framework for modeling causal explanations in terms of counterfactual simulations, and several lines of experiments testing this framework in the domain of intuitive physics. The model predicts people's causal judgments about a variety of physical scenes, including dynamic collision events, complex situations that involve multiple causes, omissions as causes, and causal responsibility for a system's stability. It also captures the cognitive processes underlying these judgments as revealed by spontaneous eye-movements. More recently, we have applied our computational framework to explain multisensory integration. I will show how people's inferences about what happened are well-accounted for by a model that integrates visual and auditory evidence through approximate physical simulations.
Exploring Memories of Scenes
State-of-the-art machine vision models can predict human recognition memory for complex scenes with astonishing accuracy. In this talk I present work that investigated how memorable scenes are actually remembered and experienced by human observers. We found that memorable scenes were recognized largely based on recollection of specific episodic details but also based on familiarity for an entire scene. I thus highlight current limitations in machine vision models emulating human recognition memory, with promising opportunities for future research. Moreover, we were interested in what observers specifically remember about complex scenes. We thus considered the functional role of eye-movements as a window into the content of memories, particularly when observers recollected specific information about a scene. We found that when observers formed a memory representation that they later recollected (compared to scenes that only felt familiar), the overall extent of exploration was broader, with a specific subset of fixations clustered around later to-be-recollected scene content, irrespective of the memorability of a scene. I discuss the critical role that our viewing behavior plays in visual memory formation and retrieval and point to potential implications for machine vision models predicting the content of human memories.
Global visual salience of competing stimuli
Current computational models of visual salience accurately predict the distribution of fixations on isolated visual stimuli. It is not known, however, whether the global salience of a stimulus, that is its effectiveness in the competition for attention with other stimuli, is a function of the local salience or an independent measure. Further, do task and familiarity with the competing images influence eye movements? In this talk, I will present the analysis of a computational model of the global salience of natural images. We trained a machine learning algorithm to learn the direction of the first saccade of participants who freely observed pairs of images. The pairs balanced the combinations of new and already seen images, as well as task and task-free trials. The coefficients of the model provided a reliable measure of the likelihood of each image to attract the first fixation when seen next to another image, that is their global salience. For example, images of close-up faces and images containing humans were consistently looked first and were assigned higher global salience. Interestingly, we found that global salience cannot be explained by the feature-driven local salience of images, the influence of task and familiarity was rather small and we reproduced the previously reported left-sided bias. This computational model of global salience allows to analyse multiple other aspects of human visual perception of competing stimuli. In the talk, I will also present our latest results from analysing the saccadic reaction time as a function of the global salience of the pair of images.
Exploring fine detail: The interplay of attention, oculomotor behavior and visual perception in the fovea
Outside the foveola, visual acuity and other visual functions gradually deteriorate with increasing eccentricity. Humans compensate for these limitations by relying on a tight link between perception and action; rapid gaze shifts (saccades) occur 2-3 times every second, separating brief “fixation” intervals in which visual information is acquired and processed. During fixation, however, the eye is not immobile. Small eye movements incessantly shift the image on the retina even when the attended stimulus is already foveated, suggesting a much deeper coupling between visual functions and oculomotor activity. Thanks to a combination of techniques allowing for high-resolution recordings of eye position, retinal stabilization, and accurate gaze localization, we examined how attention and eye movements are controlled at this scale. We have shown that during fixation, visual exploration of fine spatial detail unfolds following visuomotor strategies similar to those occurring at a larger scale. This behavior compensates for non-homogenous visual capabilities within the foveola and is finely controlled by attention, which facilitates processing at selected foveal locations. Ultimately, the limits of high acuity vision are greatly influenced by the spatiotemporal modulations introduced by fixational eye movements. These findings reveal that, contrary to common intuition, placing a stimulus within the foveola is necessary but not sufficient for high visual acuity; fine spatial vision is the outcome of an orchestrated synergy of motor, cognitive, and attentional factors.
Time is of the essence: active sensing in natural vision reveals novel mechanisms of perception
n natural vision, active vision refers to the changes in visual input resulting from self-initiated eye movements. In this talk, I will present studies that show that the stimulus-related activity during active vision differs substantially from that occurring during classical flashed-stimuli paradigms. Our results uncover novel and efficient mechanisms that improve visual perception. In a general way, the nervous system appears to engage in sensory modulation mechanisms, precisely timed to self-initiated stimulus changes, thus coordinating neural activity across different cortical areas and serving as a general mechanism for the global coordination of visual perception.