Comparison of normalization theory and neural enhancement explanation of negative aftereffects.

Over, Ray

doi:10.1037/h0030798

Cited by 67 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 98 publications

(132 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, the tilt aftereffect, in which a vertical line appears tilted counterclockwise following exposure to clockwise tilted lines, is maximal when the inspection and test lines are the same color and is reduced when they differ in color (Held & Shattuck, 1971;Lovegrove & Over, 1973 (Favreau, Emerson, & Corballis, 1972;Lovegrove, Over, & Broerse, 1972;Mayhew & Anstis, 1972). Spatial aftereffects have been attributed to selective adaptation of neural feature detectors (see Coltheart, 1971;Over, 1971), and the above data support the earlier claim that conjoint analysis of color and spatial attributes is undertaken within visual processing.…”

supporting

confidence: 76%

“…Thus, a stationary grating is seen as moving upwards following exposure to downward moving lines (successive motion contrast-aftereffect) or when viewed against a background of downward moving lines (simultaneous motion contrast-illusion). The motion aftereffect is considered to occur because some of the directionally selective motion detectors by which the stationary grating is normally signaled are temporarily in an adapted state following inspection (see Over, 1971). The illusion can be attributed to inhibitory interaction between the neural correlates of the stationary test pattern (normally signaled by the balanced response of opposed motion detectors) and the moving surrounds.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Color-selectivity in simultaneous motion contrast

Over

Lovegrove

1973

Perception & Psychophysics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Thirty-two Ss were required to estimate the apparent motion of stationary vertical lines viewed against a background of moving vertical lines when both patterns were seen by the same eye (monoptic conditions) or the center pattern was seen by one eye and the surrounds by the other eye (dichoptic conditions). The stationary lines appeared to be moving from right to left as the surrounds moved left to right. The simultaneous motion contrast found under monoptic conditions was maximal when the center pattern and the surrounds were the same color and was reduced when they differed in color. The surrounds had limited influence on the apparent motion of the center section under dichoptic condition, and the color relationship was no longer important. Related color selectivity has been reported for the motion aftereffect (successive motion contrast), and botb sets of data can be attributed to inhibitory interaction (simultaneous in one case and successive in the other) among neural detectors tuned to wavelength as well as the direction of image motion.

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 76%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Color-selectivity in simultaneous motion contrast

Over

Lovegrove

1973

Perception & Psychophysics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Typically, two-pool models have been employed to account for what appears to be opponent processing (e.g. Over, 1971) and have been successfully Consistently, many face after-effects are found to be larger for strong (e.g., extremely large or unusual) than weak adaptors indicating norm-based coding for many facial attributes (Burton, Jeffery, Skinner, Benton, & Rhodes, 2013 results have recently been modeled (Ross et al, 2014) indicating that an exemplar-based model of face-space can account for after-effects.…”

Section: Facial Adaptationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Face-Space: A Unifying Concept in Face Recognition Research

Valentine

Lewis

Hills

2016

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

183

214

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Phone: +44 (0)207 919 7871.Face-space: A unifying concept. 2 AbstractThe concept of a multi-dimensional psychological space, in which faces can be represented according to their perceived properties, is fundamental to the modern theorist in face processing. Yet the idea was not clearly expressed until 1991. The background that led to Valentine's (1991a) face-space is explained and its continuing influence on theories of face processing is discussed. Research that has explored the properties of the face-space and sought to understand caricature, including facial adaptation paradigms is reviewed. Facespace as a theoretical framework for understanding the effect of ethnicity and the development of face recognition is evaluated. Finally two applications of face-space in the forensic setting are discussed. From initially being presented as a model to explain distinctiveness, inversion and the effect of ethnicity, face-space has become a central pillar in many aspects of face processing. It is currently being developed to help us understand adaptation effects with faces. While being in principle a simple concept, face-space has shaped, and continues to shape, our understanding of face perception.

show abstract

“…Spatial aftereffects have been attributed to selective adaptation of finely tuned neural detectors (see Coltheart, 1971;Over, 1971). The assumption is that the perceived depth of a stereoscopic target is given by the relative activity of detectors maximally responsive to crossed and uncrossed disparity.…”

Section: Experiments IIImentioning

confidence: 99%

Stereospatial masking and aftereffect with normal and transformed random-dot patterns

Long

Over

1974

Perception & Psychophysics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Masking and aftereffect in the perception of binocular depth were studied using random-dot sterograms as adaptation and target stimuli. Detection of the target was impaired by prior adaptation only when the two stimuli differed in disparity by less than 2 minarc. The masking function was unaffected by uniocular enlargement and blurring within the adaptation stimulus, but masking was no longer selective to disparity when the elements seen by the two eyes were reversed in brightness. The stereoscopic depth aftereffect was also insensitive to uniocular enlargement and blurring, and could not be generated when there was brightness complementation within the adaptation stimulus. Both the masking and aftereffect data are interpreted as evidence that stereospatial detectors in human vision are insensitive to transforms that maintain luminance-spatial correlations in binocular input.

show abstract

Comparison of normalization theory and neural enhancement explanation of negative aftereffects.

Cited by 67 publications

References 98 publications

Color-selectivity in simultaneous motion contrast

Color-selectivity in simultaneous motion contrast

Face-Space: A Unifying Concept in Face Recognition Research

Stereospatial masking and aftereffect with normal and transformed random-dot patterns

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About