Task-irrelevant phase but not contrast variability unlocks generalization in visual perceptual learning

Uloženo v:
Podrobná bibliografie
Vydáno v:bioRxiv (Jan 27, 2025)
Hlavní autor: Akkoyunlu, Beyza
Další autoři: Schwiedrzik, Caspar M
Vydáno:
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
Témata:
On-line přístup:Citation/Abstract
Full Text - PDF
Full text outside of ProQuest
Tagy: Přidat tag
Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!

MARC

LEADER 00000nab a2200000uu 4500
001 2921814587
003 UK-CbPIL
022 |a 2692-8205 
024 7 |a 10.1101/2024.02.01.578442  |2 doi 
035 |a 2921814587 
045 0 |b d20250127 
100 1 |a Akkoyunlu, Beyza 
245 1 |a Task-irrelevant phase but not contrast variability unlocks generalization in visual perceptual learning 
260 |b Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press  |c Jan 27, 2025 
513 |a Working Paper 
520 3 |a Performance on visual tasks can be improved by practice, a process called visual perceptual learning. However, learning-induced performance improvements are often limited to the specific stimuli and visual field locations used during training. Recent research has shown that variability along task-irrelevant stimulus dimensions during training can reduce this specificity. This has been related to higher stages of visual processing that harbor neurons which are invariant to the task-irrelevant dimension. Here, we test whether task-irrelevant trial-by-trial variability in two visual features for which invariances arise at different stages of processing, contrast and spatial phase, results in different degrees of generalization in space in an orientation discrimination task. We find that randomizing spatial phase results in complete generalization of learning to a new spatial location, contrary to randomizing contrast. Our results thus suggest that the neural population undergoing plasticity in visual perceptual learning is determined by the training task, which, in turn, affects generalization. This lends further support to the hypothesis that task-irrelevant variability is an independent factor in determining the specificity of perceptual learning.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Footnotes* Second revision following peer review in a journal. We have added a control analysis of fixation variability and expanded the discussion section regarding limitations of the study. 
653 |a Visual plasticity 
653 |a Orientation behavior 
653 |a Information processing 
653 |a Visual discrimination learning 
653 |a Visual stimuli 
653 |a Visual field 
653 |a Neuroplasticity 
653 |a Visual discrimination 
653 |a Spatial discrimination learning 
700 1 |a Schwiedrzik, Caspar M 
773 0 |t bioRxiv  |g (Jan 27, 2025) 
786 0 |d ProQuest  |t Biological Science Database 
856 4 1 |3 Citation/Abstract  |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/2921814587/abstract/embedded/L8HZQI7Z43R0LA5T?source=fedsrch 
856 4 0 |3 Full Text - PDF  |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/2921814587/fulltextPDF/embedded/L8HZQI7Z43R0LA5T?source=fedsrch 
856 4 0 |3 Full text outside of ProQuest  |u https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.02.01.578442v3