Do the flash-lag effect and representational momentum involve similar extrapolations?

Hubbard, Timothy L.

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00290

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 98 publications

(147 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The only difference is the relative temporal position of that window with respect to the flash: whether motion is integrated before or after the flash. Hubbard (2013) noted that the perceived forward displacement of the moving object in the FLE (relative to the flash) is conceptually similar to a phenomenon called representational momentum. Hubbard (2013) argued that the FLE could be considered a special case of this phenomenon, in which the judged position of the moving target was compared with the position of a nearby stationary object rather than to the actual position of the target.…”

Section: Differential Latenciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Motion Extrapolation in Visual Processing: Lessons from 25 Years of Flash-Lag Debate

Hogendoorn

2020

J. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Because of the delays inherent in neural transmission, the brain needs time to process incoming visual information. If these delays were not somehow compensated, we would consistently mislocalize moving objects behind their physical positions. Twenty-five years ago, Nijhawan used a perceptual illusion he called the flash-lag effect (FLE) to argue that the brain's visual system solves this computational challenge by extrapolating the position of moving objects (Nijhawan, 1994). Although motion extrapolation had been proposed a decade earlier (e.g., Finke et al., 1986), the proposal that it caused the FLE and functioned to compensate for computational delays was hotly debated in the years that followed, with several alternative interpretations put forth to explain the effect. Here, I argue, 25 years later, that evidence from behavioral, computational, and particularly recent functional neuroimaging studies converges to support the existence of motion extrapolation mechanisms in the visual system, as well as their causal involvement in the FLE. First, findings that were initially argued to challenge the motion extrapolation model of the FLE have since been explained, and those explanations have been tested and corroborated by more recent findings. Second, motion extrapolation explains the spatial shifts observed in several FLE conditions that cannot be explained by alternative (temporal) models of the FLE. Finally, neural mechanisms that actually perform motion extrapolation have been identified at multiple levels of the visual system, in multiple species, and with multiple different methods. I outline key questions that remain, and discuss possible directions for future research.

show abstract

Section: Differential Latenciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Motion Extrapolation in Visual Processing: Lessons from 25 Years of Flash-Lag Debate

Hogendoorn

2020

J. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: You Said You Would! the Predictability Of Other's Behavior Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, the perceived position of a moving object is often displaced further along its trajectory, as if shifted forward in time to reflect where it will be in the immediate future. The representational momentum effect denotes the finding that after seeing a moving object suddenly disappear, people report its final position further along its trajectory than it really was, as if its perceptual representation was enriched by predictions of its future course (Freyd & Finke, 1984;Hubbard, 2005Hubbard, , 2014; flash lag effect : Hubbard, 2013;Nijhawan, 2002). These perceptual distortions show how predictive processes exploit the spatiotemporal regularities of movement (see Goldreich, 2007;Sarrazin, Giraudo, Pailhous, & Bootsma, 2004 for further examples) to maintain a coherent impression of motion even under impoverished viewing conditions (Kourtzi & Shiffrar, 1997;Munger & Minchew, 2002; for review, see Bach, Hudson & Nicholson, 2017).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

You said you would! The predictability of other’s behavior from their intentions determines predictive biases in action perception.

Hudson

Bach

Nicholson

2018

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The perception of an action is shifted farther along the observed trajectory if the observer has prior knowledge of the actor's intention. This intention-action prediction effect is explained by predictive perception models, wherein sensory input is interpreted in light of expectancies. This study altered the precision of the prediction by varying the predictability of the action from the intention, to increase/decrease the predictive perceptual bias. Participants heard an actor state an intention ("I'll take it"/"I'll leave it") before the actor reached/withdrew from an object, thus confirming or contradicting the intention. The intention was predictive of the action (75% congruency) for one group and counter-predictive (25%) for another. The action disappeared mid-movement and participants estimated the disappearance position. The intention-action prediction effect was greater if the intention was predictive than if counter-predictive. However, participants needed to explicitly know the predictability rates (Experiments 1 and 3). No group differences emerged when both groups believed the intention was non-predictive (Experiment 2a), nor when a non-predictive intention was believed to be (counter)predictive (Experiment 2b). The perception of others behavior is determined by its predictability from their intentions, and the precision of our social predictions is adapted to individual differences in behavior.

show abstract

“…There is a general tendency to remember the site of the object's disappearance as being displaced in the direction of the Extrapolation to the present 28 implied or apparent motion (Freyd & Finke, 1984;Freyd, 1987;Hubbard, 2005). RM represents an extrapolation of object motion beyond the final location of the stimulus in the direction of motion, and Hubbard (2013) argued that RM and the flash-lag effect were different manifestations of the same basic phenomenon. The aim of this section, therefore, is to assess whether displacement is extrapolation to the present or not.…”

Section: Representational Momentum (Rm)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Is the perceived present a predictive model of the objective present?

White

2018

Visual Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Processing latencies for coherent, high level percepts in vision are at least 100 ms and possibly as much as 500 ms. Processing latencies are less in other modalities, but still significant. This seems to imply that perception lags behind reality by an amount equal to the processing latency. It has been proposed that the brain can compensate for perceptual processing latencies by using the most recent available information to extrapolate forward, thereby constructing a model of what the world beyond the senses is like now. The present paper reviews several lines of evidence relating to this hypothesis, including the flash-lag effect, motion-induced position shifts, representational momentum, static visual illusions, and motion extrapolation at the retina. There are alternative explanations for most of the results but there are some findings for which no competing explanation has yet been proposed. Collectively, the evidence for extrapolation to the present is suggestive but not yet conclusive. An alternative account of compensation for processing latencies, based on the hypothesis of rapid emergence of percepts, is proposed. Keywords: perceived present moment; extrapolation to the present; predictive coding; flashlag effect; perceptual processing latencies. Word count: Main text: 16,921 Extrapolation to the present 3 Is the perceived present a predictive model of the objective present? All of us have the feeling that we live in the present moment; that is, in terms of perception, that we perceive the world outside our brains as it is now. I shall hereafter use the term "perceived present" to refer to the collective set of perceptual information that seems to us to represent the outside world as it is now. In fact, operation of peripheral sensors, neural transduction and perceptual processing of input information take time, so it can be argued that our conscious percepts are out of date by an amount equal to the combined latency of those things (hereafter just "processing latency", for convenience). 1 That is, we are in effect perceiving a moment that is in the past by however long it takes for perceptual processing to generate the percept of that moment. An alternative possibility is that the brain uses the processed information, not to represent the recent past, but to predict the present moment. In that case, conscious percepts would be the contents of the predictive model of the present moment, generated from the most recent available information. The aim of this paper is to review the evidence concerning that possibility. I shall start by briefly describing the processing latency problem, and I shall then proceed to a review of several lines of research that have been taken as evidence for the predictive model hypothesis, which I shall call the extrapolation to the present hypothesis. At the end I shall propose an alternative account, based on the hypothesis that conscious percepts begin to emerge no more than 100-150 ms after stimulus onset (ASO). Several kinds of adjustment to the temporal location of thing...

show abstract

Do the flash-lag effect and representational momentum involve similar extrapolations?

Cited by 9 publications

References 98 publications

Motion Extrapolation in Visual Processing: Lessons from 25 Years of Flash-Lag Debate

Motion Extrapolation in Visual Processing: Lessons from 25 Years of Flash-Lag Debate

You said you would! The predictability of other’s behavior from their intentions determines predictive biases in action perception.

Is the perceived present a predictive model of the objective present?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About