Spontaneous Eye Blinks Map the Probability of Perceptual Reinterpretation During Visual and Auditory Ambiguity.

Spontaneous eye blinks are modulated around perceptual events. Our previous study, using a visual ambiguous stimulus, indicated that blink probability decreases before a reported perceptual switch. In the current study, we tested our hypothesis that an absence of blinks marks a time in which perceptual switches are facilitated in- and outside the visual domain. In three experiments, presenting either a visual motion quartet in light or darkness or a bistable auditory streaming stimulus, we found a co-occurrence of blink rate reduction with increased perceptual switch probability. In the visual domain, perceptual switches induced by a short interruption of visual input (blank) allowed an estimate of the timing of the perceptual event with respect to the motor response. This provided the first evidence that the blink reduction was not a consequence of the perceptual switch. Importantly, by showing that the time between switches and the previous blink was significantly longer than the inter-blink interval, our studies allowed to conclude that perceptual switches did not happen at random but followed a prolonged period of nonblinking. Correspondingly, blink rate and switch rate showed an inverse relationship. Our study supports the idea that the absence or presence of blinks maps perceptual processes independent of the sensory modality.

Reduced occipital alpha power marks a movement induced state change that facilitates creative thinking.

Walking and minimized movement restriction has a positive effect on creativity, such as divergent thinking. Walking is further known to reduce occipital alpha activity. We used mobile EEG during free and restricted movement, while subjects (N = 23) solved a Guilford's alternate uses test, to understand if occipital alpha power is also affected by movement restriction and if it is a neural marker for creativity. We found that, independent of the task, relative occipital alpha power was higher during movement restriction and showed a negative relationship with creativity scores even though the task was purely based on auditory information. Alpha lateralization was only modulated during the task related think-time (mainly during sitting) and showed a positive relationship with creativity scores but no correlation with the relative alpha power. This indicates that the ongoing alpha power and alpha lateralization mark two independent processes. Overall, our work shows that movement and movement restriction leads to a general change in state which affects cognitive processes. Specifically, limiting one's movements e.g. due to sitting and fixating on a screen can introduce a state of increased occipital alpha power and lowered creativity.

Motor restrictions impair divergent thinking during walking and during sitting.

Creativity, specifically divergent thinking, has been shown to benefit from unrestrained walking. Despite these findings, it is not clear if it is the lack of restriction that leads to the improvement. Our goal was to explore the effects of motor restrictions on divergent thinking for different movement states. In addition, we assessed whether spontaneous eye blinks, which are linked to motor execution, also predict performance. In experiment 1, we compared the performance in Guilford's alternate uses task (AUT) during walking vs. sitting, and analysed eye blink rates during both conditions. We found that AUT scores were higher during walking than sitting. Albeit eye blinks differed significantly between movement conditions (walking vs. sitting) and task phase (baseline vs. thinking vs. responding), they did not correlate with task performance. In experiment 2 and 3, participants either walked freely or in a restricted path, or sat freely or fixated on a screen. When the factor restriction was explicitly modulated, the effect of walking was reduced, while restriction showed a significant influence on the fluency scores. Importantly, we found a significant correlation between the rate of eye blinks and creativity scores between subjects, depending on the restriction condition. Our study shows a movement state-independent effect of restriction on divergent thinking. In other words, similar to unrestrained walking, unrestrained sitting also improves divergent thinking. Importantly, we discuss a mechanistic explanation of the effect of restriction on divergent thinking based on the increased size of the focus of attention and the consequent bias towards flexibility.

How the motor aspect of speaking influences the blink rate.

The blink rate increases if a person indulges in a conversation compared to quiet rest. Since various factors were suggested to explain this increase, the present series of studies tested the influence of different motor activities, cognitive processes and auditory input on the blink behavior but at the same time minimized visual stimulation as well as social influences. Our results suggest that neither cognitive demands without verbalization, nor isolated lip, jaw or tongue movements, nor auditory input during vocalization or listening influence our blinking behavior. In three experiments, we provide evidence that complex facial movements during unvoiced speaking are the driving factors that increase blinking. If the complexity of the motor output increased such as during the verbalization of speech, the blink rate rose even more. Similarly, complex facial movements without cognitive demands, such as sucking on a lollipop, increased the blink rate. Such purely motor-related influences on blinking advise caution particularly when using blink rates assessed during patient interviews as a neurological indicator.

The latency of spontaneous eye blinks marks relevant visual and auditory information processing.

Eye blinks are influenced by external sensory and internal cognitive factors, as mainly shown in the visual domain. In previous studies, these factors corresponded to the time period of task-relevant sensory information and were often linked to a motor response. Our aim was to dissociate the influence of overall sensory input duration, task-relevant information duration, and the motor response to further understand how the temporal modulation of blinks compares among sensory modalities. Using a visual and an auditory temporal judgment task, we found that blinks were suppressed during stimulus presentation in both domains and that the overall input length had a significant positive relationship with the length of this suppression (i.e., with the latency of the first blink after stimulus onset). Importantly, excluding the influence of the overall sensory input duration we could show that the duration of task-relevant input had an additional influence on blink latency in the visual and the auditory domain. Our findings further suggest that this influence was not based on sensory input but on top-down processes. We could exclude task difficulty and the timing of the motor response as driving factors in the blink modulation. Our results suggest a sensory domain-independent modulation of blink latencies, introduced by changes in the length of the task-relevant, attended period. Therefore, not only do blinks mark the timing of sensory input or the preparation of the motor output, but they can also act as precise indicators of periods of cognitive processing.

The Role of Blinks, Microsaccades and their Retinal Consequences in Bistable Motion Perception.

Eye-related movements such as blinks and microsaccades are modulated during bistable perceptual tasks. However, if they play an active role during internal perceptual switches is not known. We conducted two experiments involving an ambiguous plaid stimulus, wherein participants were asked to continuously report their percept, which could consist of either unidirectional coherent or bidirectional component movement. Our main results show that blinks and microsaccades did not facilitate perceptual switches. On the contrary, a reduction in eye movements preceded the perceptual switch. Blanks, on the other hand, thought to mimic the retinal consequences of a blink, consistently led to a switch. Through the timing of the blank-introduced perceptual change, we were able to estimate the delay between the internal switch and the response. This delay further allowed us to evaluate that the reduction in blink probability co-occurred with the internal perceptual switch. Additionally, our results indicate that distinct internal processes underlie the switch to coherent vs. component percept. Blanks exclusively facilitated a switch to the coherent percept, and only the switch to coherent percept was followed by an increase in blink rate. In a second study, we largely replicated the findings and included a microsaccade analysis. Microsaccades only showed a weak relation with perceptual switches, but their direction was correlated with the perceived motion direction. Nevertheless, our data suggests an interaction between microsaccades and blinks by showing that microsaccades were differently modulated around blinks compared with blanks. This study shows that a reduction in eye movements precedes internal perceptual switches indicating that the rate of blinks can set the stage for a reinterpretation of sensory input. While a perceptual switch based on changed sensory input usually leads to an increase in blink rate, such an increase was only present after the perceptual switch to coherent motion but absent after the switch to component percept. This provides evidence of different underlying mechanism or internal consequence of the two perceptual switches and suggests that blinks can uncover differences in internal percept-related processes that are not evident from the percept itself.

Auditory Stimulus Detection Partially Depends on Visuospatial Attentional Resources.

Humans' ability to detect relevant sensory information while being engaged in a demanding task is crucial in daily life. Yet, limited attentional resources restrict information processing. To date, it is still debated whether there are distinct pools of attentional resources for each sensory modality and to what extent the process of multisensory integration is dependent on attentional resources. We addressed these two questions using a dual task paradigm. Specifically, participants performed a multiple object tracking task and a detection task either separately or simultaneously. In the detection task, participants were required to detect visual, auditory, or audiovisual stimuli at varying stimulus intensities that were adjusted using a staircase procedure. We found that tasks significantly interfered. However, the interference was about 50% lower when tasks were performed in separate sensory modalities than in the same sensory modality, suggesting that attentional resources are partly shared. Moreover, we found that perceptual sensitivities were significantly improved for audiovisual stimuli relative to unisensory stimuli regardless of whether attentional resources were diverted to the multiple object tracking task or not. Overall, the present study supports the view that attentional resource allocation in multisensory processing is task-dependent and suggests that multisensory benefits are not dependent on attentional resources.