Abstract
Ever since Wheatstone initiated the scientific study of binocular rivalry, it has been debated whether the phenomenon is under attentional control. In recent years, the issue of attentional modulation of binocular rivalry has seen a revival. Here we review the classical studies as well as recent advances in the study of attentional modulation of binocular rivalry. We show that (1) voluntary control over binocular rivalry is possible, yet limited, (2) both endogenous and exogenous attention influence perceptual dominance during rivalry, (3) diverting attention from rival displays does not arrest perceptual alternations, and that (4) rival targets by themselves can also attract attention. From a theoretical perspective, we suggest that attention affects binocular rivalry by modulating the effective contrast of the images in competition. This contrast enhancing effect of top-down attention is counteracted by a response attenuating effect of neural adaptation at early levels of visual processing, which weakens the response to the dominant image. Moreover, we conclude that although frontal and parietal brain areas involved in both binocular rivalry and visual attention overlap, an adapting reciprocal inhibition arrangement at early visual cortex is sufficient to trigger switches in perceptual dominance independently of a higher-level “selection” mechanisms. Both of these processes are reciprocal and therefore self-balancing, with the consequence that complete attentional control over binocular rivalry can never be realized.
Highlights
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND When Wheatstone (1838) developed his mirror stereoscope in the first half of the nineteenth century, it was possible for the first time to independently control the presentation of images to the two eyes
He describes what happens when such an image is viewed through a stereoscope, and in so doing provides the first systematic description of binocular rivalry: “If a and b are each presented at the same time to a different eye, the common border will remain constant, while the letter within it will change alternately from that which would be perceived by the right eye alone to that which would be perceived by the left eye alone
There is some evidence for the feedback possibility (Sterzer and Kleinschmidt, 2007; Britz et al, 2009), where frontal (Sterzer and Kleinschmidt, 2007) and parietal (Britz et al, 2009) activity precedes occipital activity associated with perceptual alternations. These results were obtained by using a complex Necker cube (Britz et al, 2009) and apparent motion (Sterzer and Kleinschmidt, 2007) stimuli which, clearly bistable, lack the interocular mismatch that triggers rivalry. This difference might explain the apparent difference with a study by Kamphuisen et al (2008), who used binocular rivalry stimuli and observed that while parietal and frontal activation were involved in mediating perceptual alternations, a phase analysis of this activity showed it was the result of occipital sources
Summary
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND When Wheatstone (1838) developed his mirror stereoscope in the first half of the nineteenth century, it was possible for the first time to independently control the presentation of images to the two eyes. With peripheral factors controlled, Lack (1978) showed that perceptual dominance in binocular rivalry could be significantly influenced by an act of selective attention (we will return to this point later). Attentional control over binocular rivalry was possible, the authors concluded that rivalry involved a more automatic, stimulus-driven form of perceptual bistability than did the Necker cube.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call