Skip to Main Content
Table 1. 

Relationships between Perception during IOS Rivalry and Properties of the P and M Processing Streams

Stimulus Attribute
Parallels between P Stream Properties and Stimulus Properties Leading to More SIA Rivalry
Parallels between M Stream Properties and Stimulus Properties Leading to More FRA Rivalry
P LGN Physiology (Macaques)
Effects of P LGN Lesions (Macaques)
SIA Rivalry (Humans)
M LGN Physiology (Macaques)
Effects of M LGN Lesions (Macaques)
FRA Rivalry (Humans)
Spatial frequency Small receptive fields [1], high spatial resolution [1,2] Decrease in visual acuity [3], reduction in contrast sensitivity especially for spatial frequencies >2 cpd [4] Higher spatial frequency [5, present study] Large receptive fields [1], low spatial resolution [1,2] No effect on visual acuity [4] Lower spatial frequency [5, present study] 
Temporal frequency Optimal temporal frequency ∼10 Hz [1,6] No effect on flicker detection [4] Lower flicker rates [present study] Optimal temporal frequency ∼20 Hz [1,6] Impairment of flicker detection [12], especially >15 Hz [4] Higher flicker rates [present study] 
Transience Sustained responses [7,8] N/A Longer blank between successive orthogonal stimuli [9, present study] Transient responses [7,8] N/A Shorter blank between successive orthogonal stimuli [9, present study] 
Color contrast Color-opponent receptive fields [7], strong responses to colored gratings [10] Reduction in color contrast sensitivity [3] and heterochromatic flicker sensitivity [4] Isoluminant red–green stimuli [present study] No color-opponent receptive fields [7], poor responses to chromatic gratings [10] No effect on color contrast sensitivity [3] or heterochromatic flicker sensitivity [4] Monochrome black–white stimuli [present study] 
Luminance contrast Weak contrast sensitivity [1,2] Reduction in contrast sensitivity [3,4] Lower contrast [5,11, present study] Strong contrast sensitivity [1,2] No effect on contrast sensitivity [4] except at high temporal frequencies [3] Higher contrast [5,11, present study] 
Stimulus Attribute
Parallels between P Stream Properties and Stimulus Properties Leading to More SIA Rivalry
Parallels between M Stream Properties and Stimulus Properties Leading to More FRA Rivalry
P LGN Physiology (Macaques)
Effects of P LGN Lesions (Macaques)
SIA Rivalry (Humans)
M LGN Physiology (Macaques)
Effects of M LGN Lesions (Macaques)
FRA Rivalry (Humans)
Spatial frequency Small receptive fields [1], high spatial resolution [1,2] Decrease in visual acuity [3], reduction in contrast sensitivity especially for spatial frequencies >2 cpd [4] Higher spatial frequency [5, present study] Large receptive fields [1], low spatial resolution [1,2] No effect on visual acuity [4] Lower spatial frequency [5, present study] 
Temporal frequency Optimal temporal frequency ∼10 Hz [1,6] No effect on flicker detection [4] Lower flicker rates [present study] Optimal temporal frequency ∼20 Hz [1,6] Impairment of flicker detection [12], especially >15 Hz [4] Higher flicker rates [present study] 
Transience Sustained responses [7,8] N/A Longer blank between successive orthogonal stimuli [9, present study] Transient responses [7,8] N/A Shorter blank between successive orthogonal stimuli [9, present study] 
Color contrast Color-opponent receptive fields [7], strong responses to colored gratings [10] Reduction in color contrast sensitivity [3] and heterochromatic flicker sensitivity [4] Isoluminant red–green stimuli [present study] No color-opponent receptive fields [7], poor responses to chromatic gratings [10] No effect on color contrast sensitivity [3] or heterochromatic flicker sensitivity [4] Monochrome black–white stimuli [present study] 
Luminance contrast Weak contrast sensitivity [1,2] Reduction in contrast sensitivity [3,4] Lower contrast [5,11, present study] Strong contrast sensitivity [1,2] No effect on contrast sensitivity [4] except at high temporal frequencies [3] Higher contrast [5,11, present study] 

Both physiological and lesion results from the M and P pathways are in correspondence with the stimulus conditions favoring FRA and SIA rivalry in all cases where data are available, with the partial exception of luminance contrast (see Discussion). References cited in the table are as follows: 1. Derrington & Lennie, 1984; 2. Kaplan & Shapley, 1982; 3. Merigan et al., 1991; 4. Schiller et al., 1990; 5. Lee & Blake, 1999; 6. Hicks, Lee, & Vidyasagar, 1983; 7. Schiller & Malpeli, 1978; 8. Maunsell et al., 1999; 9. van Boxtel et al., 2008; 10. Hubel & Livingstone, 1990; 11. Logothetis et al., 1996; 12. Merigan & Maunsell, 1990.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal