CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 166Visual perception and processing mechanismsMultisensory perception and integrationPhilosophy and Theoretical Science

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 44 of the 44 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Visual Sensitivity Underlying Changes in Visual Consciousness

Open access
Alais, David, Cass, John, O'Shea, Robert P., Blake, Randolph·2010·Current Biology
DOI 10.1016/j.cub.2010.06.015PMC PMC2918735
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

When viewing a different stimulus with each eye, we experience the remarkable phenomenon of binocular rivalry: alternations in consciousness between the stimuli [1, 2]. According to a popular theory first proposed in 1901, neurons encoding the two stimuli engage in reciprocal inhibition [3-8] so that those processing one stimulus inhibit those processing the other, yielding consciousness of one dominant stimulus at any moment and suppressing the other. Also according to the theory, neurons encoding the dominant stimulus adapt, weakening their activity and the inhibition they can exert, whereas neurons encoding the suppressed stimulus recover from adaptation until the balance of activity reverses, triggering an alternation in consciousness. Despite its popularity, this theory has one glaring inconsistency with data: during an episode of suppression, visual sensitivity to brief probe stimuli in the dominant eye should decrease over time and should increase in the suppressed eye, yet sensitivity appears to be constant [9, 10]. Using more appropriate probe stimuli (experiment 1) in conjunction with a new method (experiment 2), we found that sensitivities in dominance and suppression do show the predicted complementary changes.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cub.2010.06.015

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 44 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Alais, D., Cass, J., O'Shea, R. P., & Blake, R.
Affiliations
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • Western Sydney University (AU)
  • Seoul National University (KR)
Corresponding author
Blake, Randolph
ORCID
Venue
Current Biology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-08
Volume
20
Issue
15
Pages
1362-1367
ISSN
0960-9822 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.cub.2010.06.015
PMC
PMC2918735
OpenAlex
W2069201857
Cited by
166
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 10
FWCI
10.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Current Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Cross Connect (Southern Cross University) (submittedVersion)
  • Murdoch University Research Portal (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Australian Research Council (DP0770299, DP0774697)
  • National Research Foundation of Korea
  • Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (R32-10142)
  • National Institutes of Health (EY13358)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Multisensory perception and integration
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
Keywords
binocular rivalry, visual awareness, visual sensitivity, reciprocal inhibition, neural adaptation
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Physiological, Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neural Inhibition, Vision, Binocular, Contrast Sensitivity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review