Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T16:36:38.792Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

9 - Visual Plasticity of the Adult Brain

from III - PLASTICITY IN ADULTHOOD AND VISION REHABILITATION

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 January 2013

Robert F. Hess
Affiliation:
McGill University
Benjamin Thompson
Affiliation:
McGill University
Jennifer K. E. Steeves
Affiliation:
York University, Toronto
Laurence R. Harris
Affiliation:
York University, Toronto
Get access

Summary

Historical Preamble

When I arrived in Cambridge in the late 1970s to work with the late Fergus Campbell, the notion of critical periods for visual development was already well established through the seminal works of Hubel and Wiesel (1967), Blakemore (1976), and others (see Daw, 1995). The clinical implication of this was also recognized, namely, that visual improvements from the patching treatment of amblyopia were likely to be strongly age dependent and ineffective after the age of 7 to 8 years. At that time, the wisdom of Sir Stewart Duke-Elder held sway: “for patching to work it needs to be total and complete, day and night.” Fergus always felt that the stronger the statement, the more likely it was to be wrong. In fact, at that time, I remember his method for choosing research projects for graduate students. He would go to his bookshelf and choose at random one of Duke-Elder's System of Ophthalmology volumes, open it at random and locate a definitive statement on some visual topic. “Let's show this is wrong,” he would say, and the die was cast for what usually turned out to be another fruitful piece of research.

Fergus felt that some form of active stimulation would be better than the passive viewing that resulted from patching. He was enamored with the idea of the visual cortex as a spatial frequency analyzer, and because my early results suggested amblyopes suffered from severe spatial distortions (Hess et al., 1978), his first suggestion for a new therapy was to show a single spatial frequency at sequential orientations to help their visual cortex “sort out” what we hypothesized were anomalous interactions between these spatial analysers.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Astle, A. T., Webb, B. S. and McGraw, P. V. (2010). Spatial frequency discrimination learning in normal and developmentally impaired human vision. Vision Res., 50: 2445–2454.Google Scholar
Ball, K. and Sekuler, R. (1982). A specific and enduring improvement in visual motion discrimination. Science, 218: 697–698.Google Scholar
Baker, D. H.,Meese, T. S. and Hess, R. F. (2008). Contrast masking in strabismic amblyopia: attenuation, noise, interocular suppression and binocular summation. Vision Res., 48: 1625–1640.Google Scholar
Barker, A. T., Jalinous, R. and Freeston, I. L. (1985). Non-invasive magnetic stimulation of human motor cortex. Lancet, 1 (8437): 1106–1107.Google Scholar
Black, J.,Maehara, G., Thompson, B. and Hess, R. F. (2011). A compact clinical instrument for quantifying suppression. Optom. Vis. Sci., 88: 334–342.Google Scholar
Blakemore, C. (1976). The conditions required for the maintenance of binocularity in the kitten's visual cortex. J. Physiol., 261: 423–444.Google Scholar
Burgess, A. E., Wagner, R. F., Jennings, R. J. and Barlow, H. B. (1981). Efficiency of human visual signal discrimination. Science, 214: 93–94.Google Scholar
Campbell, F. W., Hess, R. F., Watson, P. G. and Banks, R. (1978). Preliminary results of a physiologically based treatment of amblyopia. Br. J. Ophthalmol., 62: 748–755.Google Scholar
Chen, Y., Geisler, W. S. and Seidemann, E. (2008). Optimal temporal decoding of neural population responses in a reaction-time visual detection task. J. Neurophysiol., 99: 1366–1379.Google Scholar
Chung, S. T., Levi, D. M. and Tjan, B. S. (2005). Learning letter identification in peripheral vision. Vision Res., 45: 1399–1412.Google Scholar
Chung, S. T., Li, R. W. and Levi, D. M. (2006). Identification of contrast-defined letters benefits from perceptual learning in adults with amblyopia. Vision Res., 46: 3853–3861.Google Scholar
Ciuffreda, K. J., Goldner, K. and Connelly, R. (1980). Lack of positive results of a physiologically based treatment of amblyopia. Br. J. Ophthalmol., 64: 607–612.Google Scholar
Connor, C. E., Brincat, S. L. and Pasupathy, A. (2007). Transformation of shape information in the ventral pathway. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol., 17: 140–147.Google Scholar
Daw, N. W. (1995). Visual Development. New York: Plenum Press.
Fox, D. (2011). Brain buzz. Nature, 472: 156–158.Google Scholar
Furmanski, C. S. and Engel, S. A. (2000). Perceptual learning in object recognition: object specificity and size invariance. Vision Res., 40: 473–484.Google Scholar
Golcu, D. and Gilbert, C. D. (2009). Perceptual learning of object shape. J. Neurosci., 29: 13621–13629.Google Scholar
Gold, J., Bennett, P. J. and Sekuler, A. B. (1999). Signal but not noise changes with perceptual learning. Nature, 402: 176–178.Google Scholar
Hess, R. F., Campbell, F. W. and Greenhalgh, T. (1978). On the nature of the neural abnormality in human amblyopia; neural aberrations and neural sensitivity loss. Pflugers Arch., 377: 201–207.Google Scholar
Hess, R. F., Mansouri, B. and Thompson, B. (2010a). A binocular approach to treating amblyopia: anti-suppression therapy. Optom. Vis. Sci., 87: 697–704.Google Scholar
Hess, R. F., Mansouri, B. and Thompson, B. (2010b). A new binocular approach to the treatment of amblyopia in adults well beyond the critical period of visual development. Restor. Neurol. Neurosci., 28: 1–10.Google Scholar
Hess, R. F., Mansouri, B. and Thompson, B. (2011). Restoration of binocular vision in amblyopia. Strabismus, 19: 110–118.Google Scholar
Hua, T., Bao, P., Huang, C. B., Wang, Z., Xu, J., Zhou, Y. and Lu, Z. L. (2010). Perceptual learning improves contrast sensitivity of V1 neurons in cats. Curr. Biol., 20: 887–894.Google Scholar
Huang, C. B., Lu, Z. L. and Zhou, Y. (2009). Mechanisms underlying perceptual learning of contrast detection in adults with anisometropic amblyopia. J. Vis., 9: 21–14.Google Scholar
Huang, C. B., Zhou, Y. and Lu, Z. L., (2008). Broad bandwidth of perceptual learning in the visual system of adults with anisometropic amblyopia. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA, 105: 4068–4073.Google Scholar
Hubel, D. and Wiesel, T. (1967). Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cats' visual cortex. J. Physiol., 160: 106–154.Google Scholar
Kersten, D. (1983). A comparison of human and ideal performance for the detection of visual pattern. PhD thesis, Univ. Minnesota.
Koskela, P. U. (1986). Contrast sensitivity in amblyopia. I. Changes during CAM treatment. Acta. Ophthalmol. (Copenh.), 64: 344–351.Google Scholar
Levi, D. M. and Li, R. W. (2009a). Improving the performance of the amblyopic visual system. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci., 364: 399–407.Google Scholar
Levi, D. M. and Li, R. W. (2009b). Perceptual learning as a potential treatment for amblyopia: a mini-review. Vision Res., 49: 2535–2549.Google Scholar
Levi, D. M. and Polat, U. (1996). Neural plasticity in adults with amblyopia. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA, 93: 6830–6834.Google Scholar
Levi, D. M., Polat, U. and Hu, Y. S. (1997). Improvement in Vernier acuity in adults with amblyopia: practice makes better. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., 38: 1493–1510.Google Scholar
Li, R. W., Klein, S. A. and Levi, D. M. (2008). Prolonged perceptual learning of positional acuity in adult amblyopia: perceptual template retuning dynamics. J. Neurosci., 28: 14223–14229.Google Scholar
Li, R. W. and Levi, D. M. (2004). Characterizing the mechanisms of improvement for position discrimination in adult amblyopia. J. Vis., 4: 476–487.Google Scholar
Liu, Z. (1999). Perceptual learning in motion discrimination that generalizes across motion directions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 96: 14085–14087.Google Scholar
Mansouri, B., Thompson, B. and Hess, R. F. (2008). Measurement of suprathreshold binocular interactions in amblyopia. Vision Res., 48: 2775–2784.Google Scholar
Meese, T. S., Georgeson, M. A. and Baker, D. H. (2006). Binocular contrast vision at and above threshold. J. Vis., 6: 1224–1243.Google Scholar
Meese, T. S. and Hess, R. F. (2004). Low spatial frequencies are suppressively masked across spatial scale, orientation, field position, and eye of origin. J. Vis., 4: 843–859.Google Scholar
Mitchell, D. E., Howell, E. R. and Keith, C. G. (1983). The effect of minimal occlusion therapy on binocular visual functions in amblyopia. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., 24: 778–781.Google Scholar
Nyman, K. G., Singh, G., Rydberg, A. and Fornander, M. (1983). Controlled study comparing CAM treatment with occlusion therapy. Br. J. Ophthalmol., 67: 178–180.Google Scholar
Pelli, D. G. (1981). Effects of visual noise. PhD thesis, University of Cambridge.
Polat, U.,Ma-Naim, T.,Belkin, M. and Sagi, D. (2004). Improving vision in adult amblyopia by perceptual learning. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 101: 6692–6697.Google Scholar
Sengpiel, F., Jirmann, K. U., Vorobyov, V. and Eysel, U. T. (2006). Strabismic suppression is mediated by inhibitory interactions in the primary visual cortex. Cereb. Cortex, 16: 1750–1758.Google Scholar
Shibata, K., Watanabe, T., Sasaki, Y. and Kawato, M. (2011). Perceptual learning incepted by fMRI neurofeedback without stimulus presentation. Science, 334: 1413–1415.Google Scholar
Sowden, P. T., Rose, D. and Davies, I. R. (2002). Perceptual learning of luminance contrast detection: specific for spatial frequency and retinal location but not orientation. Vision Res., 42: 1249–1258.Google Scholar
Stewart, L., Battelli, L., Walsh, V. and Cowey, A. (1999). Motion perception and perceptual learning studied by magnetic stimulation. Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. Suppl., 51: 334–350.Google Scholar
Tarkkanen, A. and Tommila, V. (1983). Treatment of amblyopia using a CAM vision stimulator. Ophthalmic Paediatr. Genet., 2: 27–38.Google Scholar
Thompson, B.,Mansouri, B., Koski, L. and Hess, R. F. (2008). Brain plasticity in the adult: modulation of function in amblyopia with rTMS. Curr. Biol., 18: 1067–1071.Google Scholar
Thompson, B.,Mansouri, B., Koski, L. and Hess, R. F. (2012). From motor cortex to visual cortex: the application of non-invasive brain stimulation to amblyopia. Dev. Psychobiol., 54: 263–273.Google Scholar
Tytla, M.E. and Labow-Daily, L. S. (1981). Evaluation of theCAMtreatment for amblyopia: a controlled study. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., 20: 400–406.Google Scholar
Waterston, M. L. and Pack, C. C. (2010). Improved discrimination of visual stimuli following repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. PLoS One, 5: e10354.Google Scholar
Watson, P. G., Sanac, A. S. and Pickering, M. S. (1985). A comparison of various methods of treatment of amblyopia: a block study. Trans. Ophthalmol. Soc. UK, 104: 319–328.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, F., James, T. W., Wilson, H. R., Gati, J. S., Menon, R. S. and Goodale, M. A. (2000). An fMRI study of the selective activation of human extrastriate form vision areas by radial and concentric gratings. Curr. Biol., 10: 1455–1458.Google Scholar
Woo, G. C. and Dalziel, C. C. (1981). A pilot study of contrast sensitivity assessment of the CAM treatment of amblyopia. Acta. Ophthalmol. (Copenh.), 59: 35–37.Google Scholar
Yu, C., Klein, S. A. and Levi, D. M. (2004). Perceptual learning in contrast discrimination and the (minimal) role of content. J. Vis., 4: 169–182.Google Scholar
Zhou, Y., Huang, C., Xu, P., Tao, L., Qiu, Z., Li, X. and Lu, Z. L. (2006). Perceptual learning improves contrast sensitivity and visual acuity in adults with anisometropic amblyopia. Vision Res., 46: 739–750.Google Scholar
Zhou, J., Zhang, Y., Dai, Y., Zhao, H., Liv, R., Hou, F., Liang, B., Hess, R. F. and Zhou, Y. (2012). The eye limits the brains learning potential. Sci. Rep., 2: 364.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×