2012
DOI: 10.1167/12.13.10
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Motion information is sometimes used as an aid to the visual tracking of objects

Abstract: In everyday life, observers often need to visually track moving objects. Currently, there is a debate as to whether observers utilize motion information in doing this or whether they rely purely on positional information (e.g., frame-by-frame locations). In our experiments, we had observers keep track of a subset of moving objects. In one condition, the objects moved in straight lines and their future positions were thus predictable. In a second condition, the objects changed directions randomly. Across three … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

6
50
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(57 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
6
50
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Furthermore, the higher detection rates in the motion-change condition can be explained by the fact that the anticipated target locations of the polygon (Iordanescu, Grabowecky, & Suzuki, 2009) are no longer perceptible because of a target stop, whereas the polygon still exists in the form-change condition, causing lower detection rates. In this case, presumably because of the high tracking load with four targets (Fencsik et al, 2007;Howe & Holcombe, 2012;Luu & Howe, 2015), no motion extrapolation seems to be used in MOT. Hence, change detection results could be explained better with the multifocal theory and concurrent streams on the targets, where position information was used for tracking because participants were able to detect motion as well as form changes.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, the higher detection rates in the motion-change condition can be explained by the fact that the anticipated target locations of the polygon (Iordanescu, Grabowecky, & Suzuki, 2009) are no longer perceptible because of a target stop, whereas the polygon still exists in the form-change condition, causing lower detection rates. In this case, presumably because of the high tracking load with four targets (Fencsik et al, 2007;Howe & Holcombe, 2012;Luu & Howe, 2015), no motion extrapolation seems to be used in MOT. Hence, change detection results could be explained better with the multifocal theory and concurrent streams on the targets, where position information was used for tracking because participants were able to detect motion as well as form changes.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some researchers have argued that in multiple object tracking with at least four objects, motion information is not used to update indexes during the occlusion of the corresponding objects (Keane & Pylyshyn 2006;Horowitz et al 2006); rather, 'MOT through occlusion seems to rely on a simple heuristic based only on the proximity of reappearance locations to the objects' last known preocclusion locations' (Franconeri et al 2012, p. 700). However information about motion is sometimes available and used in tracking multiple objects simultaneously (Howe & Holcombe 2012;St Clair 2012). One possibility is that, in tracking four objects simultaneously, motion information can be used to distinguish targets from distractors but not to predict the future positions of objects (Howe & Holcombe 2012, p. 8).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The reasons for these discrepant results between studies are not clear. However, some have suggested that there is some mechanism for making use of motion information for such extrapolatory processes which has a very low capacity (<=2 objects, Howe & Holcombe, 2012) and perhaps this very low capacity was not sufficient to result in detectable extrapolation for low loads in the experiments reported here.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 76%