Linking Neuronal Direction Selectivity to Perceptual Decisions About Visual Motion
Authors: Tatiana Pasternak
Duje Tadin
Journal: Annual Review of Vision Science (2020)
Discipline: NEUROSCIENCE & BEHAVIOR
Keywords: area MT; direction discrimination; motion perception; prefrontal cortex; speed discrimination
Affiliations: Department of Neuroscience, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York 14642, USA;,, Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York 14627, USA, Center for Visual Science, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York 14627, USA, Del Monte Institute for Neuroscience, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York 14642, USA, Department of Ophthalmology, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York 14642, USA

Abstract:  Psychophysical and neurophysiological studies of responses to visual motion have converged on a consistent set of general principles that characterize visual processing of motion information. Both types of approaches have shown that the direction and speed of target motion are among the most important encoded stimulus properties, revealing many parallels between psychophysical and physiological responses to motion. Motivated by these parallels, this review focuses largely on more direct links between the key feature of the neuronal response to motion, direction selectivity, and its utilization in memory-guided perceptual decisions. These links were established during neuronal recordings in monkeys performing direction discriminations, but also by examining perceptual effects of widespread elimination of cortical direction selectivity produced by motion deprivation during development. Other approaches, such as microstimulation and lesions, have documented the importance of direction-selective activity in the areas that are active during memory-guided direction comparisons, area MT and the prefrontal cortex, revealing their likely interactions during behavioral tasks. 

Retracted: No

PubPeer comments:
 u201cFor plaid stimuli, DS V1 neurons signal directions of components that make up the plaid, rather than the coherently moving plaid direction perceived by human observers (Movshon et al. 1985)u201d I don t believe Movshon et al (1985), framed as a review and a theoretical proposal (i.e. a speculative claim) and included in a collection of papers coming out of a 1983 u201cStudy Weeku201d published by The Pontifical Academy of Sciences, is adequate support for the fundamental claim being linked to it. It is quite old, and it is not an experimental paper. It does cite older experimental papers, mostly older than 1980. But with respect to the function of V1 neurons, the picture was still admittedly fuzzy as late as 2005, when Carandini et al published an [article] in the Journal of Neuroscience titled u201cDo we know what the early visual system does?u201d (In it, conventional notions such as u201ccontour detectionu201d are called into question: u201cAnother theory bias often embedded in investigations of V1 function is the notion that simple cells and complex cells are actually coding for the presence of edges, corners, or other two-dimensional shape features in images. However, despite much effort in computer vision, it has proven impossible to detect even the simple outline of an object using a filter such as a simple- or complex-cell model. Moreover, it is entirely unclear whether such a representation would be meaningful or useful in the first place.u201d) In addition, Movshon et al (1985) make a factual misstatement. Referring to their Figure 1, they state: u201cAny motion parallel to a grating s bars is invisible, and only motion normal to the bars can be detected.u201d This is an overgeneralization from the situation applying to circular apertures, such as those shown in the figure. The same claim is made by Adelson and Movshon (1982), paired with a citation to Wallach, 1935. In fact, Wallach s findings contradicted the claim. Based on an extensive series of experiments, he concluded that:  There exists a tendency for line motion to be perpendicular to line orientation, and also a tendency to perceive motion along one of the cardinal directions of space. Above all, however, the perceived direction of motion runs as parallel as possible to the direction of the edge of the aperture that the line happens to intersect. If the two aperture edges that are intersected simultaneously have different orientations, then the line pursues an intermediate direction; being a subject of psychophysical `self-organizationu2019u2026u201d (From translation in [Wuerger et al 1996] ). In other words, we may indeed observe motion that is not normal to the orientation of the lines or bars; as in the case of the barberpole illusion. So again, as a reference offered in support of the neural signalling-component-motion-in-plaids claim, Movshon et al (1985) seems inadequate. But the claim seems weighty enough to demand relevant references. ,