4.7 Article

Neural Processes for Intentional Control of Perceptual Switching: A Magnetoencephalography Study

Journal

HUMAN BRAIN MAPPING
Volume 32, Issue 3, Pages 397-412

Publisher

WILEY-LISS
DOI: 10.1002/hbm.21022

Keywords

Intentional control; magnetoencephalography; perceptual switching; dynamical dot quartet; stimulus onset asynchrony

Funding

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article reports an interesting link between the psychophysical property of intentional control of perceptual switching and the underlying neural activities. First, we revealed that the timing of perceptual switching for a dynamical dot quartet can be controlled by the observers' intention, without eye movement. However, there is a clear limitation to this control, such that each animation frame of the stimulus must be presented for a sufficiently long time length; in other words, the frequency of the stimulus alternation must be sufficiently slow for the control. The typical stimulus onset asynchrony for a 50% level of success was about 275 ms for an average of 10 observers. On the basis of psychophysical property, we designed three experiments for investigating the neural process with a magnetoencephalography. They revealed that: (1) a peak component occurring about 300 ms after a reversal was stronger when the direction of perceived motion was switched intentionally than when it was not switched, and (2) neural components about 30-40 ms and 240-250 ms after the reversal of the stimulus animation were stronger when perception was altered intentionally than when it was switched unintentionally. The 300 ms component is consistent with a previous study about passive perceptual switching (Struber and Herrmann [2002]: Cogn Brain Res 14: 370-382), but the intentional effect was seemed to be a different component from the well-known P300 component. Hum Brain Mapp 32:397-412, 2011. (C) 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available