Early blind participants outperform controls on several spatially oriented perceptual tasks such as sound localization and tactile orientation discrimination. Previous studies have suggested that the recruitment of occipital cortex in the blind is responsible for this improvement. For example, electroencephalographic studies showed an enlarged posterior negativity for the blind in these tasks compared to controls. In our study, the question was raised whether the early blind are also better at tasks in which the duration of auditory and tactile stimuli must be discriminated. The answer was affirmative. Our electroencephalographic data revealed an enlarged posterior negativity for the blind relative to controls. Source analyses showed comparable solutions in the case of auditory and tactile targets for the blind. These findings support the interpretation of these negativities in terms of a supramodal rather than a modality-specific process, although confirmation with more spatially sensitive methods seems necessary. We additionally examined whether the early blind are less affected by irrelevant tactile or auditory exogenous cues preceding auditory or tactile targets than controls. No differences in alerting and orienting effects of these cues were found between the blind and the controls. Together, our results support the view that major differences between early blind participants and sighted controls on auditory and tactile duration discrimination tasks relate to a late and likely supramodal process that takes place in occipital areas.

Viewing static pictures of running humans evokes neural activity in the dorsal motion-sensitive cortex. To establish whether this response arises from direction-selective neurons that are also involved in real motion processing, we measured the visually evoked potential to implied motion following adaptation to static or moving random dot patterns. The implied motion response was defined as the difference between evoked potentials to pictures with and without implied motion. Interaction between real and implied motion was found as a modulation of this difference response by the preceding motion adaptation. The amplitude of the implied motion response was significantly reduced after adaptation to motion in the same direction as the implied motion, compared to motion in the opposite direction. At 280 msec after stimulus onset, the average difference in amplitude reduction between opposite and same adapted direction was 0.5 μV on an average implied motion amplitude of 2.0 μV. These results indicate that the response to implied motion arises from direction-selective motion-sensitive neurons. This is consistent with interactions between real and implied motion processing at a neuronal level.

Viewing static photographs of objects in motion evokes higher fMRI activation in the human medial temporal complex (MT+) than looking at similar photographs without this implied motion. As MT+ is traditionally thought to be involved in motion perception (and not in form perception), this finding suggests feedback from object-recognition areas onto MT+. To investigate this hypothesis, we recorded extracranial potentials evoked by the sight of photographs of biological agents with and without implied motion. The difference in potential between responses to pictures with and without implied motion was maximal between 260 and 400 msec after stimulus onset. Source analysis of this difference revealed one bilateral, symmetrical dipole pair in the occipital lobe. This area also showed a response to real motion, but approximately 100 msec earlier than the implied motion response. The longer latency of the implied motion response in comparison to the real motion response is consistent with a feedback projection onto MT+ following object recognition in higher-level temporal areas.

Several studies examining spatial attention have found a discrepancy regarding the effects of exogenous cues on reaction times in visual detection and discrimination tasks. Namely, across a wide range of cue-target intervals, responses are slower for targets at cued than at uncued locations (inhibition of return) in detection tasks, whereas responses are faster for targets at cued than at uncued locations (facilitation) in discrimination tasks. Two hypotheses were proposed to account for this discrepancy. First, attention may dwell much longer on the exogenously cued location in discrimination tasks because stimuli have to be identified (i.e., the delayed attention withdrawal hypothesis). Secondly, due to increased motor preparation in detection tasks, cue-induced motor inhibition may rise much faster in these tasks than in discrimination tasks (i.e., the speeded motor inhibition hypothesis). We examined to what extent these hypotheses can account for effects of exogenous cues in a detection and discrimination task on the extrastriate P1 component, and the onset of motor activation, as indexed by the lateralized readiness potential. Some support was found for the delayed attention withdrawal hypothesis, as task-dependent cueing effects were found on the P1 component. Other aspects of our data, however, indicate that motor inhibition is also involved. Based on these findings, we propose that effects of exogenous cues in detection and discrimination tasks are determined by the interplay between two mechanisms, of which the time courses of activation may be modulated by the specific setting.