Deconstructing Interocular Suppression: Attention and Divisive Normalization

Hsin Hung Li, Marisa Carrasco, David J. Heeger

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

In interocular suppression, a suprathreshold monocular target can be rendered invisible by a salient competitor stimulus presented in the other eye. Despite decades of research on interocular suppression and related phenomena (e.g., binocular rivalry, flash suppression, continuous flash suppression), the neural processing underlying interocular suppression is still unknown. We developed and tested a computational model of interocular suppression. The model included two processes that contributed to the strength of interocular suppression: divisive normalization and attentional modulation. According to the model, the salient competitor induced a stimulus-driven attentional modulation selective for the location and orientation of the competitor, thereby increasing the gain of neural responses to the competitor and reducing the gain of neural responses to the target. Additional suppression was induced by divisive normalization in the model, similar to other forms of visual masking. To test the model, we conducted psychophysics experiments in which both the size and the eye-of-origin of the competitor were manipulated. For small and medium competitors, behavioral performance was consonant with a change in the response gain of neurons that responded to the target. But large competitors induced a contrast-gain change, even when the competitor was split between the two eyes. The model correctly predicted these results and outperformed an alternative model in which the attentional modulation was eye specific. We conclude that both stimulus-driven attention (selective for location and feature) and divisive normalization contribute to interocular suppression.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numbere1004510
JournalPLoS Computational Biology
Volume11
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - 2015

Fingerprint

Normalization
eyes
Modulation
Flash
Psychophysics
Target
Model
Selective Attention
Masking
Binoculars
Neurons
Computational Model
normalisation
Neuron
Research
neurons
Unknown
Alternatives
Experiment
Processing

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Computational Theory and Mathematics
  • Modeling and Simulation
  • Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
  • Genetics
  • Molecular Biology
  • Ecology
  • Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience

Cite this

Deconstructing Interocular Suppression : Attention and Divisive Normalization. / Li, Hsin Hung; Carrasco, Marisa; Heeger, David J.

In: PLoS Computational Biology, Vol. 11, No. 10, e1004510, 2015.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{a2a2ccd4897f418fa35a66497910a992,
title = "Deconstructing Interocular Suppression: Attention and Divisive Normalization",
abstract = "In interocular suppression, a suprathreshold monocular target can be rendered invisible by a salient competitor stimulus presented in the other eye. Despite decades of research on interocular suppression and related phenomena (e.g., binocular rivalry, flash suppression, continuous flash suppression), the neural processing underlying interocular suppression is still unknown. We developed and tested a computational model of interocular suppression. The model included two processes that contributed to the strength of interocular suppression: divisive normalization and attentional modulation. According to the model, the salient competitor induced a stimulus-driven attentional modulation selective for the location and orientation of the competitor, thereby increasing the gain of neural responses to the competitor and reducing the gain of neural responses to the target. Additional suppression was induced by divisive normalization in the model, similar to other forms of visual masking. To test the model, we conducted psychophysics experiments in which both the size and the eye-of-origin of the competitor were manipulated. For small and medium competitors, behavioral performance was consonant with a change in the response gain of neurons that responded to the target. But large competitors induced a contrast-gain change, even when the competitor was split between the two eyes. The model correctly predicted these results and outperformed an alternative model in which the attentional modulation was eye specific. We conclude that both stimulus-driven attention (selective for location and feature) and divisive normalization contribute to interocular suppression.",
author = "Li, {Hsin Hung} and Marisa Carrasco and Heeger, {David J.}",
year = "2015",
doi = "10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004510",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "11",
journal = "PLoS Computational Biology",
issn = "1553-734X",
publisher = "Public Library of Science",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Deconstructing Interocular Suppression

T2 - Attention and Divisive Normalization

AU - Li, Hsin Hung

AU - Carrasco, Marisa

AU - Heeger, David J.

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - In interocular suppression, a suprathreshold monocular target can be rendered invisible by a salient competitor stimulus presented in the other eye. Despite decades of research on interocular suppression and related phenomena (e.g., binocular rivalry, flash suppression, continuous flash suppression), the neural processing underlying interocular suppression is still unknown. We developed and tested a computational model of interocular suppression. The model included two processes that contributed to the strength of interocular suppression: divisive normalization and attentional modulation. According to the model, the salient competitor induced a stimulus-driven attentional modulation selective for the location and orientation of the competitor, thereby increasing the gain of neural responses to the competitor and reducing the gain of neural responses to the target. Additional suppression was induced by divisive normalization in the model, similar to other forms of visual masking. To test the model, we conducted psychophysics experiments in which both the size and the eye-of-origin of the competitor were manipulated. For small and medium competitors, behavioral performance was consonant with a change in the response gain of neurons that responded to the target. But large competitors induced a contrast-gain change, even when the competitor was split between the two eyes. The model correctly predicted these results and outperformed an alternative model in which the attentional modulation was eye specific. We conclude that both stimulus-driven attention (selective for location and feature) and divisive normalization contribute to interocular suppression.

AB - In interocular suppression, a suprathreshold monocular target can be rendered invisible by a salient competitor stimulus presented in the other eye. Despite decades of research on interocular suppression and related phenomena (e.g., binocular rivalry, flash suppression, continuous flash suppression), the neural processing underlying interocular suppression is still unknown. We developed and tested a computational model of interocular suppression. The model included two processes that contributed to the strength of interocular suppression: divisive normalization and attentional modulation. According to the model, the salient competitor induced a stimulus-driven attentional modulation selective for the location and orientation of the competitor, thereby increasing the gain of neural responses to the competitor and reducing the gain of neural responses to the target. Additional suppression was induced by divisive normalization in the model, similar to other forms of visual masking. To test the model, we conducted psychophysics experiments in which both the size and the eye-of-origin of the competitor were manipulated. For small and medium competitors, behavioral performance was consonant with a change in the response gain of neurons that responded to the target. But large competitors induced a contrast-gain change, even when the competitor was split between the two eyes. The model correctly predicted these results and outperformed an alternative model in which the attentional modulation was eye specific. We conclude that both stimulus-driven attention (selective for location and feature) and divisive normalization contribute to interocular suppression.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84946021427&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84946021427&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004510

DO - 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004510

M3 - Article

C2 - 26517321

AN - SCOPUS:84946021427

VL - 11

JO - PLoS Computational Biology

JF - PLoS Computational Biology

SN - 1553-734X

IS - 10

M1 - e1004510

ER -