Biomedical subjects

John H Reynolds

Publications and source records attributed to John H Reynolds.

7 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

A motion-dependent distortion of retinotopy in area V4.

When one element in an apparent motion sequence differs in color from the others, it is perceived as shifted along the motion trajectory. We examined whether V4 neurons encode the physical or perceived location of this "flashed" element by recording neuronal responses while monkeys viewed these stimuli. The retinotopic locus of V4 activity evoked by the flashed element shifted along the motion trajectory. The magnitude of the shift is consistent with the perceptual shift in humans viewing identical stimuli. This retinotopic distortion depended on the presence of a flashed element but was observed for both color-selective and non-color-selective neurons. The distortion was undiminished when the flashed element terminated the sequence, a condition that reduced the perceptual shift in humans. These findings are consistent with a Bayesian model of localization in which perceived location is derived from position signals optimally integrated across visual areas.

Action Potentials↗

PubMed2005

Interacting competitive selection in attention and binocular rivalry.

Visuomotor processing is selective - only a small subset of stimuli that impinge on the retinae reach perceptual awareness and/or elicit behavioral responses. Both binocular rivalry and attention involve visual selection, but affect perception quite differently. During rivalry, awareness alternates between different stimuli presented to the two eyes. In contrast, attending to one of the two stimuli impairs discrimination of the ignored stimulus, but without causing it to perceptually disappear. We review experiments demonstrating that, despite their phenomenological differences, attention and rivalry depend upon shared competitive selection mechanisms. These experiments, moreover, reveal stimulus selection that is surface-based and requires coordination between the different neuronal populations that respond as a surface changes its attributes (type of motion) over time. This surface-based selection, in turn biases interocular competition, favoring the eye whose image is consistent with the selected surface. The review ends with speculation about the role of the thalamus in mediating this dynamic coordination, as well as thoughts about what underlies the differences in the phenomenology of selective attention and rivalry.

Animals↗

PubMed2004

Object-based attention determines dominance in binocular rivalry.

A question of long-standing interest to philosophers, psychologists and neuroscientists is how the brain selects which signals enter consciousness. Binocular rivalry and attention both involve selection of visual stimuli, but affect perception quite differently. During binocular rivalry, awareness alternates between two different stimuli presented to the two eyes. In contrast, attending to one of two different stimuli impairs discrimination of the ignored stimulus, but without causing it to disappear from consciousness. Here we show that despite this difference, attention and rivalry rely on shared object-based selection mechanisms. We cued attention to one of two superimposed transparent surfaces and then deleted the image of one surface from each eye, resulting in rivalry. Observers usually reported seeing only the cued surface. They were also less accurate in judging unpredictable changes in the features of the uncued surface. Our design ensured that selection of the cued surface could not have resulted from spatial, ocular or feature-based mechanisms. Rather, attention was drawn to one surface, and this caused the other surface to be perceptually suppressed during rivalry. These results raise the question of how object representations compete during these two forms of perceptual selection, even as the features of those objects change unpredictably over time.

Attention↗

PubMed2004

Attentional modulation of visual processing.

Single-unit recording studies in the macaque have carefully documented the modulatory effects of attention on the response properties of visual cortical neurons. Attention produces qualitatively different effects on firing rate, depending on whether a stimulus appears alone or accompanied by distracters. Studies of contrast gain control in anesthetized mammals have found parallel patterns of results when the luminance contrast of a stimulus increases. This finding suggests that attention has co-opted the circuits that mediate contrast gain control and that it operates by increasing the effective contrast of the attended stimulus. Consistent with this idea, microstimulation of the frontal eye fields, one of several areas that control the allocation of spatial attention, induces spatially local increases in sensitivity both at the behavioral level and among neurons in area V4, where endogenously generated attention increases contrast sensitivity. Studies in the slice have begun to explain how modulatory signals might cause such increases in sensitivity.

Action Potentials↗

PubMed2003

Interacting roles of attention and visual salience in V4.

Attention increases the contrast gain of V4 neurons, causing them to respond to an attended stimulus as though its contrast had increased. When multiple stimuli appear within a neuron's receptive field (RF), the neuron responds primarily to the attended stimulus. This suggests that cortical cells may be "hard wired" to respond preferentially to the highest-contrast stimulus in their RF, and neural systems for attention capitalize on this mechanism by dynamically increasing the effective contrast of the stimulus that is task relevant. To test this, we varied the relative contrast of two stimuli within the recorded neurons' RFs, while the monkeys attended away to another location. Increasing the physical contrast of one stimulus caused V4 neurons to respond preferentially to that stimulus and reduced their responses to competing stimuli. When attention was directed to the lower-contrast stimulus, it partially overcame the influence of a competing, higher-contrast stimulus.

Animals↗

PubMed2003

Exogenously cued attention triggers competitive selection of surfaces.

It has been reported that when an endogenous cue directs attention to a brief translation of one of two superimposed surfaces, observers reliably report the direction of that translation as well as the direction of a second translation of the cued surface. In contrast, if the uncued surface translates second, direction judgments are severely impaired for several hundred milliseconds. We replicated this result, but found that the impairment survived the removal of the endogenous cue. The impairment is therefore not due to endogenously cued attention. Instead, a brief translation of one surface acts as an exogenous cue that triggers an automatic selection mechanism, which suppresses processing of the other surface. This study provides a clear case of exogenous cueing of surface-based attention. We relate these results to identified competitive selection mechanisms in visual cortex.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2003

Attentional selection of superimposed surfaces cannot be explained by modulation of the gain of color channels.

When two differently colored, superimposed patterns of dots rotate in opposite directions, this yields the percept of two superimposed transparent surfaces. If observers are cued to attend to one set of dots, they are impaired in making judgments about the other set. Since the two sets of dots are overlapping, the cueing effect cannot be explained by spatial attention. This has led to the interpretation that the impairment reflects surface-based attentional selection. However, recent single-unit recording studies in monkeys have found that attention can modulate the gain of neurons tuned for features such as color. Thus, rather than reflecting the selection of a surface, the behavioral effects might simply reflect a reduction in the gain of color channels selective for the color of the uncued set of dots (feature-based attention), as if viewing the surfaces through a colored filter. If so, then the impairment should be eliminated when the two surfaces are made the same color. Instead, we find that the impairment persists with no reduction in strength. Our findings thus rule out the color gain explanation.

Adult↗