The brain organizes the continuous flow of sensory input by parsing it into discrete events. In the case of two flashes separated by a brief ISI, for example, perception may be of a single flash or two distinct flashes, depending on the ISI but also on the speed of processing. A number of studies have reported evidence that participants with a higher EEG peak alpha frequency are able to detect the presence of two flashes separated by short intervals, whereas those with slower alpha report only one flash. Other studies have not found this correlation. We investigated potential factors that might mask the relationship between individual alpha frequency and visual perception. We recorded resting-state EEG from a large sample of participants ( n = 50) and measured the temporal resolution of visual perception with the two-flash fusion task. We found that individual alpha frequency over posterior channels predicted the two-flash fusion threshold, in line with previous studies, but this correlation was significant only when taking into account the steepness of the psychophysical curve of the two-flash task. Participants with a relatively shallow psychophysical curve, likely reflecting high sensory and/or decision noise, failed to show this relationship. These findings replicate previous reports of a correlation between alpha frequency and visual temporal resolution, while also suggesting that an explanation of two-flash fusion performance that neglects the role of internal noise might be insufficient to account for all individual differences.

Although visual input arrives continuously, sensory information is segmented into (quasi-)discrete events. Here, we investigated the neural correlates of spatiotemporal binding in humans with magnetoencephalography using two tasks where separate flashes were presented on each trial but were perceived, in a bistable way, as either a single or two separate events. The first task (two-flash fusion) involved judging one versus two flashes, whereas the second task (apparent motion: AM) involved judging coherent motion versus two stationary flashes. Results indicate two different functional networks underlying two unique aspects of temporal binding. In two-flash fusion trials, involving an integration window of ∼50 msec, evoked responses differed as a function of perceptual interpretation by ∼25 msec after stimuli offset. Multivariate decoding of subjective perception based on prestimulus oscillatory phase was significant for alpha-band activity in the right medial temporal (V5/MT) area, with the strength of prestimulus connectivity between early visual areas and V5/MT being predictive of performance. In contrast, the longer integration window (∼130 msec) for AM showed evoked field differences only ∼250 msec after stimuli offset. Phase decoding of the perceptual outcome in AM trials was significant for theta-band activity in the right intraparietal sulcus. Prestimulus theta-band connectivity between V5/MT and intraparietal sulcus best predicted AM perceptual outcome. For both tasks, phase effects found could not be accounted by concomitant variations in power. These results show a strong relationship between specific spatiotemporal binding windows and specific oscillations, linked to the information flow between different areas of the where and when visual pathways.