During binocular rivalry, perception alternates between two different images presented one to eac... more During binocular rivalry, perception alternates between two different images presented one to each eye. At any moment, one image is visible, dominant, while the other is invisible, suppressed. Alternations in perception during rivalry could involve competition between eyes, eye-rivalry, or between images, image-rivalry, or both. We measured response criteria, sensitivities, and thresholds to brief contrast increments to one of the rival stimuli in conventional rivalry displays and in a display in which the rival stimuli swapped between the eyes every 333 ms–swap rivalry–that necessarily involves image rivalry. We compared the sensitivity and threshold measures in dominance and suppression to assess the strength of suppression. We found that response criteria are essentially the same during dominance and suppression for the two sorts of rivalry. Critically, we found that swap-rivalry suppression is weak after a swap and strengthens throughout the swap interval. We propose that image rivalry is responsible for weak initial suppression immediately after a swap and that eye rivalry is responsible for the stronger suppression that comes later.
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 2011
The part-report advantage has been used to identify short-lived forms of visual storage (Sperling... more The part-report advantage has been used to identify short-lived forms of visual storage (Sperling, 1960). We adopt the part-report paradigm to test whether visual memory can preserve, for a brief time, successive inputs and their temporal order. In our experiments, two successive arrays, each of 4 digits, were presented on each trial. The two arrays were spatially coincident, and each was followed by a random pattern-mask. In the part-report conditions, an auditory cue indicated whether the participant should report the first array or the second array. The results consistently showed a part-report advantage, which ranged in size from 16% to 37%. Delaying the cue by 500 ms abolished most of this advantage, in that performance was then similar to that in whole-report conditions. Subsequent experiments confirmed that the part-report superiority we measure is not achieved by (a) making eye movements that spatially displace the second array relative to the first; (b) extracting information from a single snapshot containing an integrated representation of the targets and masks; or (c) transferring a subset of material to a phonological store. We propose instead that observers have access to a limited, rapidly decaying representation of successive visual inputs stored in temporal sequence.
During binocular rivalry, perception alternates between two different images presented one to eac... more During binocular rivalry, perception alternates between two different images presented one to each eye. At any moment, one image is visible, dominant, while the other is invisible, suppressed. Alternations in perception during rivalry could involve competition between eyes, eye-rivalry, or between images, image-rivalry, or both. We measured response criteria, sensitivities, and thresholds to brief contrast increments to one of the rival stimuli in conventional rivalry displays and in a display in which the rival stimuli swapped between the eyes every 333 ms-swap rivalry-that necessarily involves image rivalry. We compared the sensitivity and threshold measures in dominance and suppression to assess the strength of suppression. We found that response criteria are essentially the same during dominance and suppression for the two sorts of rivalry. Critically, we found that swap-rivalry suppression is weak after a swap and strengthens throughout the swap interval. We propose that image ...
During binocular rivalry, perception alternates between two different images presented one to eac... more During binocular rivalry, perception alternates between two different images presented one to each eye. At any moment, one image is visible, dominant, while the other is invisible, suppressed. Alternations in perception during rivalry could involve competition between eyes, eye-rivalry, or between images, image-rivalry, or both. We measured response criteria, sensitivities, and thresholds to brief contrast increments to one of the rival stimuli in conventional rivalry displays and in a display in which the rival stimuli swapped between the eyes every 333 ms–swap rivalry–that necessarily involves image rivalry. We compared the sensitivity and threshold measures in dominance and suppression to assess the strength of suppression. We found that response criteria are essentially the same during dominance and suppression for the two sorts of rivalry. Critically, we found that swap-rivalry suppression is weak after a swap and strengthens throughout the swap interval. We propose that image rivalry is responsible for weak initial suppression immediately after a swap and that eye rivalry is responsible for the stronger suppression that comes later.
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 2011
The part-report advantage has been used to identify short-lived forms of visual storage (Sperling... more The part-report advantage has been used to identify short-lived forms of visual storage (Sperling, 1960). We adopt the part-report paradigm to test whether visual memory can preserve, for a brief time, successive inputs and their temporal order. In our experiments, two successive arrays, each of 4 digits, were presented on each trial. The two arrays were spatially coincident, and each was followed by a random pattern-mask. In the part-report conditions, an auditory cue indicated whether the participant should report the first array or the second array. The results consistently showed a part-report advantage, which ranged in size from 16% to 37%. Delaying the cue by 500 ms abolished most of this advantage, in that performance was then similar to that in whole-report conditions. Subsequent experiments confirmed that the part-report superiority we measure is not achieved by (a) making eye movements that spatially displace the second array relative to the first; (b) extracting information from a single snapshot containing an integrated representation of the targets and masks; or (c) transferring a subset of material to a phonological store. We propose instead that observers have access to a limited, rapidly decaying representation of successive visual inputs stored in temporal sequence.
During binocular rivalry, perception alternates between two different images presented one to eac... more During binocular rivalry, perception alternates between two different images presented one to each eye. At any moment, one image is visible, dominant, while the other is invisible, suppressed. Alternations in perception during rivalry could involve competition between eyes, eye-rivalry, or between images, image-rivalry, or both. We measured response criteria, sensitivities, and thresholds to brief contrast increments to one of the rival stimuli in conventional rivalry displays and in a display in which the rival stimuli swapped between the eyes every 333 ms-swap rivalry-that necessarily involves image rivalry. We compared the sensitivity and threshold measures in dominance and suppression to assess the strength of suppression. We found that response criteria are essentially the same during dominance and suppression for the two sorts of rivalry. Critically, we found that swap-rivalry suppression is weak after a swap and strengthens throughout the swap interval. We propose that image ...
Uploads
Papers by Rishi Bhardwaj