Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Synchrony does not promote grouping in temporally structured displays

Abstract

It has been proposed that the human visual system can use temporal synchrony to bind image regions into unified objects1,2,3, as proposed in some neural models4. Here we present experimental results from a new dynamic stimulus suggesting that previous evidence for this hypothesis can be explained with the well-established mechanisms of early visual processing, thus obviating the need to posit new synchrony-sensitive grouping mechanisms (see also ref. 5 for a critique of the binding by neural synchrony hypothesis).

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

$32.00

All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: One frame of the Gabor and dot stimulus, and sample output of temporal band-pass filtering.
Figure 2: Temporal properties of the dot stimulus.
Figure 3: Experimental results.

References

  1. Fahle, M. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 254, 199–203 (1993).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Usher, M. & Donnelly, N. Nature 394, 179–181 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Lee, S. & Blake, R. Science 8, 1165–1168 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Singer, W. & Gray, C. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 18, 555–586 (1995).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Shadlen, M. N. & Movshon, J. A. Neuron 24, 67–77 (1999).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Adelson, E. H. & Farid, H. Science 286, 2231 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Watson, A. B. Handbook of Perception and Human Performance (Wiley, New York, 1986).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Geisler, W. S. & Albrecht, D. G. Vis. Neurosci. 14, 897–919 (1997).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Kandil, F. I. & Fahle, M. Eur. J. Neurosci. 13, 2004–2008 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Brainard, D. H. Spat. Vis. 10, 443–446 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

H.F. is supported by a National Science Foundation Career Award (IIS-99-83806) and a departmental National Science Foundation Infrastructure grant (EIA-98-02068). E.H.A. is supported by a National Institute of Health grant (EY12690-02).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hany Farid.

Supplementary information

QuickTime movies of our dynamic dot stimulus.

(a) The 180 degrees straight condition (MOV 984 KB)

(b) The 120 degrees zig-zag condition (MOV 950 KB)

(c) The 90 degrees random-walk condition (MOV 984 KB)

The perception of form is visible only in condition (a) which is the only condition that contains a temporal contrast cue. The motion reversals in all three conditions are synchronized.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Farid, H., Adelson, E. Synchrony does not promote grouping in temporally structured displays. Nat Neurosci 4, 875–876 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1038/nn0901-875

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nn0901-875

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing