Averaging, not internal noise, limits the development of coherent motion processing

Manning, Catherine; Dakin, Steven C.; Tibber, Marc S.; Pellicano, Liz

doi:10.1016/j.dcn.2014.07.004

Cited by 37 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 68 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results for effective sample size are lower than the majority of studies reporting samples for averaging size33 and motion31, however Manning et al 34. have observed sampling efficiencies at or below one for motion in children.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 84%

Spatial limitations in averaging social cues

Florey

Clifford

Dakin

et al. 2016

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The direction of social attention from groups provides stronger cueing than from an individual. It has previously been shown that both basic visual features such as size or orientation and more complex features such as face emotion and identity can be averaged across multiple elements. Here we used an equivalent noise procedure to compare observers’ ability to average social cues with their averaging of a non-social cue. Estimates of observers’ internal noise (uncertainty associated with processing any individual) and sample-size (the effective number of gaze-directions pooled) were derived by fitting equivalent noise functions to discrimination thresholds. We also used reverse correlation analysis to estimate the spatial distribution of samples used by participants. Averaging of head-rotation and cone-rotation was less noisy and more efficient than averaging of gaze direction, though presenting only the eye region of faces at a larger size improved gaze averaging performance. The reverse correlation analysis revealed greater sampling areas for head rotation compared to gaze. We attribute these differences in averaging between gaze and head cues to poorer visual processing of faces in the periphery. The similarity between head and cone averaging are examined within the framework of a general mechanism for averaging of object rotation.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 84%

Spatial limitations in averaging social cues

Florey

Clifford

Dakin

et al. 2016

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Given our results, this challenge constitutes a different degree of difficulty for both groups, as the ASD group clearly outperforms the TD group. A recent study by Manning et al [] found evidence for increased sampling or increased pooling of information in individuals with ASD relative to TD individuals, when participants were presented with sets of moving dots. Translating this idea of increased sampling to our findings entails that, compared with TD participants, participants with ASD would use (or sample across) more items in order to properly encode an ensemble.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many object and scene features have been investigated in relation to ensemble processing. Low‐level features that have been investigated include size [e.g., Ariely, ; Chong & Treisman, ], number [e.g., Halberda, Sires, & Feigenson, ], orientation (e.g., Dakin, Bex, Cass, & Watt, ; Dakin & Watt, ], and motion direction [e.g., Manning, Dakin, Tibber, & Pellicano, ]. High‐level visual features that have been evaluated include facial emotions [Haberman & Whitney, ] and spatial layout [Alvarez & Oliva, ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ensemble perception in autism spectrum disorder: Member‐identification versus mean‐discrimination

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To efficiently represent the outside world our brain compresses sets of similar items into a summarized representation, a phenomenon known as ensemble perception. While most studies on ensemble perception investigate this perceptual mechanism in typically developing (TD) adults, more recently, researchers studying perceptual organization in individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) have turned their attention toward ensemble perception. The current study is the first to investigate the use of ensemble perception for size in children with and without ASD (N = 42, 8-16 years). We administered a pair of tasks pioneered by Ariely [2001] evaluating both member-identification and mean-discrimination. In addition, we varied the distribution types of our sets to allow a more detailed evaluation of task performance. Results show that, overall, both groups performed similarly in the member-identification task, a test of "local perception," and similarly in the mean identification task, a test of "gist perception." However, in both tasks performance of the TD group was affected more strongly by the degree of stimulus variability in the set, than performance of the ASD group. These findings indicate that both TD children and children with ASD use ensemble statistics to represent a set of similar items, illustrating the fundamental nature of ensemble coding in visual perception. Differences in sensitivity to stimulus variability between both groups are discussed in relation to recent theories of information processing in ASD (e.g., increased sampling, decreased priors, increased precision). Autism Res 2017. © 2017 International Society for Autism Research, Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Autism Res 2017, 10: 1291-1299. © 2017 International Society for Autism Research, Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

show abstract

“…Most CM studies use random dot kinematograms (RDKs), for which participants are required to discriminate the overall dominant motion direction of a field of dots, while a certain percentage of the dots moves randomly across the display. However, rather than being a direct test for global processing capacities, as frequently thought, CM tasks actually confound the capacity to integrate local inputs into global percepts with one's sensitivity to noise (Dakin, Mareschal, & Bex, 2005;Manning, Dakin, Tibber, & Pellicano, 2014). While RDK performance in ASD is predominantly interpreted in relation to possible global integration deficits (or weak central coherence), the results could also be interpreted in terms of the participants' ability to cope with noise inherently present in the displays.…”

Section: Robustness In Perception and Actionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disentangling signal and noise in autism spectrum disorder

Cruys

Hallen

Wagemans

2017

Brain and Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tPredictive coding has recently been welcomed as a fruitful framework to understand autism spectrum disorder. Starting from an account centered on deficient differential weighting of prediction errors (based in so-called precision estimation), we illustrate that individuals with autism have particular difficulties with separating signal from noise, across different tasks. Specifically, we discuss how deficient precision-setting is detrimental for learning in unstable environments, for context-dependent assignment of salience to inputs, and for robustness in perception, as illustrated in coherent motion paradigms.

show abstract

Averaging, not internal noise, limits the development of coherent motion processing

Cited by 37 publications

References 68 publications

Spatial limitations in averaging social cues

Spatial limitations in averaging social cues

Ensemble perception in autism spectrum disorder: Member‐identification versus mean‐discrimination

Disentangling signal and noise in autism spectrum disorder

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About