Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Figure 1.
Experimental paradigm and response distributions. a, In the simple visual condition, participants performed a binocular rivalry task before and after 150 min of monocular deprivation. Participants indicated the orientation of the grating they perceive. b, In the simple motor task, participants were instructed to tap their fingers in the order displayed on the screen. Numbers corresponded to fingers. Each hand was trained separately. For each hand, participants practiced four different sequences: two test sequences (14 blocks) and two control sequences (1 block). Forty-five minutes after the initial training of a hand, participants performed the same four sequences for two blocks each. c, In the combined condition, participants performed the motor task during the monocular deprivation (MD) period. Binocular rivalry was performed before and after the MD period. d, e, Normalized phase duration distributions in de baseline blocks of the simple and combined visual conditions. The distributions are fitted with a γ function (Eq. 1). f, g, Log-transformed reaction time distributions, normalized across participants, in the first block of simple and combined motor conditions. The distributions are fitted with a Gaussian function (Eq. 3). h, Correlation between the ODI measured at baseline in the simple versus combined condition (performed on different days).
- Figure 2.
Results. a, Ocular dominance index (ODI) difference from baseline for the simple visual (red symbols) and combined (blue symbols) conditions. Error bars represent 1 ± SEM. b, Change in reaction times (RT) during motor learning (difference from baseline mean RT) in the simple (red symbols) and combined (blue symbols) conditions. Error bars represent 1 ± SEM. c, Scatter plot of the ODI difference measured during the first 8 min after monocular deprivation in the simple versus combined condition. d, Scatter plot of the RT change from baseline in 14th block in the simple versus combined condition.
- Figure 3.
Correlation between visual and motor plasticity. a, Correlation between the visual plasticity score (ODI change in 8 min-after-deprivation) and motor plasticity score based on mean reaction time difference from baseline in the last block (0 - mean RT difference in 14th block). b, Correlation between the visual plasticity score (same as panel a) and motor plasticity score based on reaction time difference from baseline in the second block (1, mean RT difference in second block).
- Figure 4.
ODI change in the control task. a, In the control study, during the monocular deprivation, 10 participants read short stories on a gray background, displayed a few lines at a time. b, ODI change after monocular deprivation for the simple visual (red symbols), combined (blue symbols), and control (yellow symbols) condition. Error bars represent 1 ± SEM.
- Figure 5.
Working memory task. a, In the working memory study, 21 participants performed a working memory task during the monocular deprivation. A set of white letters were briefly flashed on a gray background. After a retention period of 3 s, participants saw a probe letter flashed and judged whether it was part of the set. They received an auditory feedback after their response. b, ODI change after monocular deprivation for the simple visual (red symbols), combined (blue symbols) and working memory control (black symbols) condition. Error bars represent 1 ± SEM. c, Correlation of baseline ocular dominance index in the repeated simple condition and the working memory and combined conditions.
In this issue
