Pupillometry indexes ocular dominance plasticity.

Short-term monocular deprivation in normally sighted adult humans produces a transient shift of ocular dominance, boosting the deprived eye. This effect has been documented with both perceptual tests and through physiological recordings, but no previous study simultaneously measured physiological responses and the perceptual effects of deprivation. Here we propose an integrated experimental paradigm that combines binocular rivalry with pupillometry, to introduce an objective physiological index of ocular dominance plasticity, acquired concurrently with perceptual testing. Ten participants reported the perceptual dynamics of binocular rivalry, while we measured pupil diameter. Stimuli were a white and a black disk, each presented monocularly. Rivalry dynamics and pupil-size traces were compared before and after 2 h of monocular deprivation, achieved by applying a translucent patch over the dominant eye. Consistent with prior research, we observed that monocular deprivation boosts the deprived-eye signal and consequently increases ocular dominance. In line with previous studies, we also observed subtle but systematic modulations of pupil size that tracked alternations between exclusive dominance phases of the black or white disk. Following monocular deprivation, the amplitude of these pupil-size modulations increased, which is consistent with the post-deprivation boost of the deprived eye and the increase of ocular dominance. This provides evidence that deprivation impacts the effective strength of monocular visual stimuli, coherently affecting perceptual reports and the automatic and unconscious regulation of pupil diameter. Our results show that a combined paradigm of binocular rivalry and pupillometry gives new insights into the physiological mechanisms underlying deprivation effects.

Measuring the reliability of binocular rivalry.

Binocular rivalry is a widely used tool in sensory and cognitive neuroscience to investigate different aspects of vision and cognition. The dynamics of binocular rivalry (e.g., duration of perceptual dominance phases and mixed percept proportions) differ across individuals; based on rivalry dynamics, it is also possible to calculate an index of ocular dominance (by comparing the perceptual dominance of the images in the two eyes). In this study, we investigated the reliability of binocular rivalry dynamics using different methods for dichoptic stimulation and different rivalry stimuli. For the three main indices we defined (ocular dominance, phase durations and mixed percept proportions), we found a high test-retest reliability across sessions. Moreover, the test-retest reliability of the ocular dominance index was predictable from its internal consistency, supporting its stability over time. Phase durations and mixed percept proportions, in contrast, had worse test-retest reliability than expected based on internal consistency, indicating that these parameters are susceptible to state-dependent changes. Our results support the use of the ocular dominance index and binocular rivalry in the measurement of sensory eye dominance and its plasticity, but advise caution when investigating the association between phase durations or mixed percepts and stable characteristics like psychological traits or disorders.

Attention cueing in rivalry: insights from pupillometry.

We used pupillometry to evaluate the effects of attention cueing on perceptual bi-stability, as reported by adult human observers. Perceptual alternations and pupil diameter were measured during two forms of rivalry, generated by presenting a white and a black disk to the two eyes (binocular rivalry) or splitting the disks between eyes (interocular grouping rivalry). In line with previous studies, we found that subtle pupil size modulations (about 0.05 mm) tracked alternations between exclusive dominance phases of the black or white disk. These pupil responses were larger for perceptually stronger stimuli: presented to the dominant eye or with physically higher luminance contrast. However, cueing of endogenous attention to one of the rivaling percepts did not affect pupil modulations during exclusive dominance phases. This was observed despite the reliable effects of endogenous attention on perceptual dominance, which shifted in favor of the cued percept by about 10%. The results were comparable for binocular and interocular grouping rivalry. Cueing only had a marginal modulatory effect on pupil size during mixed percepts in binocular rivalry. This may suggest that, rather than acting by modulating perceptual strength, endogenous attention primarily acts during periods of unresolved competition, which is compatible with attention being automatically directed to the rivaling stimuli during periods of exclusive dominance and thereby sustaining perceptual alternations.Significance StatementBinocular rivalry depends on attention. When it is diverted away from the stimuli, perceptual alternations slow down; when it is preferentially directed to one stimulus, perception lingers more on it, consistent with attention enhancing the effective strength of the rivaling stimuli. Here we introduce pupillometry as a means to indirectly track changes in effective stimulus strength. We find that pupil size accurately tracks perceived luminance during two forms of rivalry: binocular rivalry and interocular grouping rivalry. Both show robust effects of attention cueing on perceptual dominance, but pupil modulations during exclusive dominance are unaffected by cueing. This suggests that endogenous attention does not affect perceptual strength during exclusive dominance, though it might do so during transition phases.