Letter | Published:

A new perceptual illusion reveals mechanisms of sensory decoding

Nature volume 446, pages 912915 (19 April 2007) | Download Citation

Abstract

Perceptual illusions are usually thought to arise from the way sensory signals are encoded by the brain, and indeed are often used to infer the mechanisms of sensory encoding1. But perceptual illusions might also result from the way the brain decodes sensory information2, reflecting the strategies that optimize performance in particular tasks. In a fine discrimination task, the most accurate information comes from neurons tuned away from the discrimination boundary3,4, and observers seem to use signals from these ‘displaced’ neurons to optimize their performance5,6,7. We wondered whether using signals from these neurons might also bias perception. In a fine direction discrimination task using moving random-dot stimuli, we found that observers’ perception of the direction of motion is indeed biased away from the boundary. This misperception can be accurately described by a decoding model that preferentially weights signals from neurons whose responses best discriminate those directions. In a coarse discrimination task, to which a different decoding rule applies4, the same stimulus is not misperceived, suggesting that the illusion is a direct consequence of the decoding strategy that observers use to make fine perceptual judgments. The subjective experience of motion is therefore not mediated directly by the responses of sensory neurons, but is only developed after the responses of these neurons are decoded.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    Visual illusions and neurobiology. Nature Rev. Neurosci. 2, 920–926 (2001)

  2. 2.

    Eye and Brain: The Psychology of Seeing 5th edn (Oxford Univ. Press, 1997)

  3. 3.

    & Simple models for reading neuronal population codes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 90, 10749–10753 (1993)

  4. 4.

    & Optimal representation of sensory information by neural populations. Nature Neurosci. 9, 690–696 (2006)

  5. 5.

    Auditory filter shapes derived with noise stimuli. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 59, 640–654 (1976)

  6. 6.

    & Postadaptation orientation discrimination. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 2, 147–155 (1985)

  7. 7.

    & Different populations of neurons contribute to the detection and discrimination of visual motion. Vision Res. 41, 685–689 (2001)

  8. 8.

    & Sense and the single neuron: probing the physiology of perception. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 21, 227–277 (1998)

  9. 9.

    The variability of discharge of simple cells in the cat striate cortex. Exp. Brain Res. 44, 437–440 (1981)

  10. 10.

    , & The statistical reliability of signals in single neurons in cat and monkey visual cortex. Vision Res. 23, 775–785 (1983)

  11. 11.

    , , & The analysis of visual motion: a comparison of neuronal and psychophysical performance. J. Neurosci. 12, 4745–4765 (1992)

  12. 12.

    , & Categories and particulars: Prototype effects in estimating spatial location. Psychol. Rev. 98, 352–376 (1991)

  13. 13.

    & Reference repulsion when judging the direction of visual motion. Perception 27, 393–402 (1998)

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by a research grant from the NIH. We are grateful to B. Lau, E. Simoncelli, D. Heeger, M. Landy and N. Graham for advice and discussion.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Center for Neural Science, New York University, 4 Washington Place, New York, New York 10003, USA

    • Mehrdad Jazayeri
    •  & J. Anthony Movshon

Authors

  1. Search for Mehrdad Jazayeri in:

  2. Search for J. Anthony Movshon in:

Competing interests

Reprints and permissions information is available at www.nature.com/reprints. The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mehrdad Jazayeri.

Supplementary information

PDF files

  1. 1.

    Supplementary Information

    This file contains Supplementary Methods, Supplementary Figures 1–3 with Legends and Supplementary Discussion. The Supplementary Information includes two Supplementary Figures detailing the fit of a more complete model to the data, a Supplementary Figure showing a breakdown of the data from Fig. 4, and a discussion of the possible role of response bias in the results reported.

About this article

Publication history

Received

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature05739

Further reading

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.