Slezak Emily, Shevell Steven K
J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis. 2020 Apr 1;37(4):A97-A104. doi: 10.1364/JOSAA.381132.
Multiple regions, each with the same ambiguous chromatic neural representation, are resolved to have the identical perceived color more often than chance [Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA93, 15508 (1996)PNASA60027-842410.1073/pnas.93.26.15508; J. Opt. Soc. Am. A35, B85 (2018)JOAOD60740-323210.1364/JOSAA.35.000B85]. This reveals that the regions are grouped, but it is unclear whether they are grouped because each one has the identical competing representations of the same stimuli (that is, the same chromaticities) or, alternatively, identical competing representations of the same colors one sees. The current study uses chromatic induction, as in Nat. Neurosci.6, 801 (2003)NANEFN1097-625610.1038/nn1099, to disentangle whether grouping depends on identical (though ambiguous) stimulus chromaticities or on perceived colors, by (1) inducing one chromaticity to appear in two different colors or (2) inducing two different chromaticities to appear in the same color. All stimuli were equiluminant gratings with chromatic inducing and test fields. Three observers were tested, first completing color matches to measure induced color-appearance shifts and second completing grouping measurements using interocular-switch rivalry, a method with rivalrous dichoptic images swapped between the eyes at 3.75 Hz [J. Vis.17, 9 (2017)1534-736210.1167/17.5.9]. Each of two separate areas, one above and one below fixation, had dichoptic rivalry. The two sets of regions had either identical or different chromaticities that could appear either as the same color or not. Observers reported their percepts when both areas above and below fixation were grouped by color or by chromaticity (or neither in an additional experimental condition). All conditions showed significant groupings for every observer, including when neither color nor chromaticity was identical in a "group." Moreover, there was never a significant effect of chromaticity versus color for any observer. This is the result expected if neither color nor chromaticity must match between two regions in order for them to be grouped and suggests that, instead, some other feature drives grouping.
多个区域，每个区域都具有相同的模糊色觉神经表征，它们被解析为具有相同的感知颜色，其概率高于随机概率[《美国国家科学院院刊》93, 15508 (1996)PNASA60027 - 842410.1073/pnas.93.26.15508；《美国光学学会志A》35, B85 (2018)JOAOD60740 - 323210.1364/JOSAA.35.000B85]。这表明这些区域被分组了，但尚不清楚它们被分组是因为每个区域具有相同刺激（即相同色度）的相同竞争性表征，还是因为具有相同颜色的相同竞争性表征（即人们所看到的相同颜色）。当前的研究采用了如《自然神经科学》6, 801 (2003)NANEFN1097 - 625610.1038/nn1099中所述的色诱导方法，通过以下方式来厘清分组是取决于相同（尽管模糊）的刺激色度还是感知颜色：(1) 诱导一种色度以两种不同颜色出现，或者(2) 诱导两种不同色度以相同颜色出现。所有刺激均为具有色诱导和测试场的等亮度光栅。对三名观察者进行了测试，首先完成颜色匹配以测量诱导的颜色外观变化，其次使用双眼切换竞争完成分组测量，这是一种以3.75赫兹在双眼之间交换竞争的双眼图像的方法[《视觉杂志》17, 9 (2017)1534 - 736210.1167/17.5.9]。在注视点上方和下方的两个独立区域中，每个区域都有双眼竞争。这两组区域具有相同或不同的色度，这些色度可以呈现为相同颜色，也可以不呈现为相同颜色。当注视点上方和下方的两个区域按颜色或色度分组时（或者在另一个实验条件下既不按颜色也不按色度分组），观察者报告他们的感知。所有条件下，每位观察者都表现出显著的分组，包括在一个“组”中颜色和色度都不相同的情况。此外，对于任何观察者来说，色度与颜色之间从未有过显著影响。如果两个区域之间不需要颜色或色度匹配就能被分组，那么这就是预期的结果，这表明，相反，是其他一些特征驱动了分组。
