Simple Science

Cutting edge science explained simply

# Biology# Neuroscience

How Eye Movements Shape Visual Processing

Study shows how eye movements influence brain response to visual information.

Carmen Amme, P. Sulewski, E. Spaak, M. N. Hebart, P. Koenig, T. C. Kietzmann

― 5 min read


Eye Movements and BrainEye Movements and BrainResponsevisual processing.New findings on how movement impacts
Table of Contents

When we look around, our eyes move quickly to gather visual information. We make many small movements called Saccades, followed by a brief pause called a fixation. Most research on how we process what we see has been done using methods where people keep their eyes still while different images are shown. This approach measures brain activity in response to those images. However, this isn't how we usually see the world. In real life, our eyes are always moving, and this movement affects how we process what we see.

Recent studies have started to look at how our Brains work in more natural situations, allowing our eyes to move freely as we look at many different scenes. The goal is to see if the brain starts processing visual information as soon as our eyes begin to move, rather than waiting for our eyes to stop.

The Experiment

In a recent experiment, researchers collected data from five participants who looked at 4,080 different natural scenes. They used two main tools: magnetoencephalography (MEG), which tracks brain activity, and eye-tracking technology, which follows where the participants are looking. This setup allowed researchers to gather data on approximately 200,000 eye movements, tracking both the saccades and the Fixations.

The researchers found that a specific brain response called the M100, which is one of the earliest signs of Visual Processing, occurred soon after the eyes began their movements (saccades) rather than when the eyes stopped (fixations). This means the brain starts working on visual information even before we fix our gaze on something.

Findings on Eye Movements

To study this, the researchers looked closely at the M100 response by comparing it to the duration of the saccades. They found that the timing of the M100 response was more closely linked to the beginning of the saccade. When they measured the brain's response during the fixation phase as well, they noted a key difference: while some brain activity was still tied to when the eye stopped, most of it was happening during the movement itself.

They associated the M100 with the timing of the saccades instead of fixations. This observation was consistent across all participants. Further analysis revealed that as the duration of the saccade increased, the time it took for the M100 response to show up decreased, indicating that the brain adjusts its response based on the eye movement.

Components of Visual Processing

The researchers also looked at how the responses from saccades compared to responses triggered by the presentation of visual scenes. They found that the brain's response when a scene first appears had some similarities to the response from a zero-duration saccade, but they also showed significant differences. In particular, the brain's activity was in opposite directions for these two events, suggesting that different processes are at play in how we respond to visual scenes compared to how we respond to our own eye movements.

Using advanced techniques, the researchers were able to visualize where in the brain these activities occurred. They found that while responses to saccades and fixations could sometimes be similar, they were generally not the same as responses triggered by a visual stimulus. This information suggests that our brains process these different types of visual input using different methods.

Implications of the Findings

The results indicate that it's important to rethink how we study visual processing. Many studies have treated the moment when we fixate on something as the same as when a visual stimulus is presented. However, the findings from this study show that what happens when we move our eyes should be taken into account too.

This implies that our brains are not just passively waiting for images to show up. Instead, our visual processing is actively influenced by our movements and what we might expect to see based on our previous experiences. The brain appears to use predictions about what is coming next, which is consistent with a theory about how our brain processes information based on prior knowledge.

Importance of Active Vision

Active vision is the idea that what we see is shaped by our actions. The eye movements we make aren't just random; they are guided by what we want to look at and what we have seen before. These observations point to a new way of looking at how we process visual information.

Future research can dive deeper into how these processes work, focusing more on how we actively explore our environment. Understanding this can help create better models for visual processing, potentially leading to advancements in fields like artificial intelligence, where machines try to mimic human sight.

Conclusion

This study sheds light on how we process visual information in natural settings. By focusing on how our eye movements influence brain activity, the researchers highlight the importance of considering our actions in understanding visual processing. Instead of seeing the brain as a passive receiver of information, we can view it more as an active participant that uses eye movements to anticipate and interpret what lies ahead. More research in this area can help us learn more about how we see the world around us, and how these mechanisms might differ from traditional laboratory settings.

Original Source

Title: Saccade onset, not fixation onset, best explains early responses across the human visual cortex during naturalistic vision

Abstract: Visual processing has traditionally been investigated using static viewing paradigms, where participants are presented with streams of randomized stimuli. Observations from such experiments have been generalized to naturalistic vision, which is based on active sampling via eye movements. In studies of naturalistic vision, visual processing stages are thought to be initiated at the onset of fixations, equivalent to a stimulus onset. Here we test whether findings from static visual paradigms translate to active, naturalistic vision. Utilizing head-stabilized magnetoencephalography (MEG) and eye tracking data of 5 participants who freely explored thousands of natural images, we show that saccade onset, not fixation onset, explains most variance in latency and amplitude of the early sensory component M100. Source-projected MEG topographies of image and saccade onset were anticorrelated, demonstrating neural dynamics that share similar topographies but produce oppositely oriented fields. Our findings challenge the prevailing approach for studying natural vision and highlight the role of internally generated signals in the dynamics of sensory processing.

Authors: Carmen Amme, P. Sulewski, E. Spaak, M. N. Hebart, P. Koenig, T. C. Kietzmann

Last Update: 2024-10-30 00:00:00

Language: English

Source URL: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.10.25.620167

Source PDF: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.10.25.620167.full.pdf

Licence: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Changes: This summary was created with assistance from AI and may have inaccuracies. For accurate information, please refer to the original source documents linked here.

Thank you to biorxiv for use of its open access interoperability.

More from authors

Similar Articles