de.mpg.escidoc.pubman.appbase.FacesBean
English
 
Help Guide Disclaimer Contact us Login
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Journal Article

Preexposure disrupts learning of location-contingent perceptual biases for ambiguous stimuli

MPS-Authors
http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/cone/persons/resource/persons84272

van Dam,  LCJ
Research Group Multisensory Perception and Action, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

http://pubman.mpdl.mpg.de/cone/persons/resource/persons83906

Ernst,  MO
Research Group Multisensory Perception and Action, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

Locator
There are no locators available
Fulltext (public)
There are no public fulltexts available
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

van Dam, L., & Ernst, M. (2010). Preexposure disrupts learning of location-contingent perceptual biases for ambiguous stimuli. Journal of Vision, 10(8:15), 1-17. doi:10.1167/10.8.15.


Cite as: http://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0013-BF28-3
Abstract
The perception of a bistable stimulus as one or the other interpretation can be biased by prior presentations of that stimulus. Such learning effects have been found to be long lasting even after small amounts of training. The effectiveness of training may be influenced by preexposure to the ambiguous stimulus. Here we investigate the role of preexposure for learning a position-dependent perceptual bias. We used rotating Necker Cubes as the bistable stimuli, which were presented at two locations: above or below fixation. On training trials, additional depth cues disambiguated the rotation direction contingent on the location. On test trials, the rotating cube was presented without disambiguation cues. Without preexposure to the ambiguous stimulus, subjects learned to perceive the cube to be rotating in the trained direction for both locations. However, subjects that were preexposed to the ambiguous stimulus did not learn the trained percept–location contingency, even though the preexposure was very short com pared to the subsequent training. Preexposure to the disambiguated stimulus did not interfere with learning. This indicates a fundamental difference between ambiguous test and disambiguated training trials for learning a perceptual bias. In short, small variations in paradigm can have huge effects for the learning of perceptual biases for ambiguous stimuli.