Perceived speed of motion in depth modulates misjudgements of approaching trajectories consistently with a slow prior

Aguado, Borja; López‐Moliner, Joan

doi:10.1016/j.visres.2019.03.009

Cited by 5 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This study aimed to shed light on the extent to which visually evoked self-motion influences perceived lateral object speed in a naturalistic setting. This is particularly relevant as the visual system has been shown to use velocity information to extrapolate object trajectories to compensate for noisy online information and neural delays (Aguado & López-Moliner, 2019 ; Aguilar-Lleyda et al, 2018 ; Jörges & López-Moliner, 2019 ; López-Moliner et al, 2010 ). The aim of this project is thus to verify the impact of visually simulated observer motion on accuracy and precision for object speed judgments during lateral translation, which will further our understanding of flow parsing and help us understand the conditions under which flow parsing is incomplete.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Object speed perception during lateral visual self-motion

Jörges

Harris

2021

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Judging object speed during observer self-motion requires disambiguating retinal stimulation from two sources: self-motion and object motion. According to the Flow Parsing hypothesis, observers estimate their own motion, then subtract the retinal corresponding motion from the total retinal stimulation and interpret the remaining stimulation as pertaining to object motion. Subtracting noisier self-motion information from retinal input should lead to a decrease in precision. Furthermore, when self-motion is only simulated visually, self-motion is likely to be underestimated, yielding an overestimation of target speed when target and observer move in opposite directions and an underestimation when they move in the same direction. We tested this hypothesis with a two-alternative forced-choice task in which participants judged which of two motions, presented in an immersive 3D environment, was faster. One motion interval contained a ball cloud whose speed was selected dynamically according to a PEST staircase, while the other contained one big target travelling laterally at a fixed speed. While viewing the big target, participants were either static or experienced visually simulated lateral self-motion in the same or opposite direction of the target. Participants were not significantly biased in either motion profile, and precision was only significantly lower when participants moved visually in the direction opposite to the target. We conclude that, when immersed in an ecologically valid 3D environment with rich self-motion cues, participants perceive an object’s speed accurately at a small precision cost, even when self-motion is simulated only visually.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Object speed perception during lateral visual self-motion

Jörges

Harris

2021

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This pattern does not bode well with participants only misjudging the direction in depth (Aguado & López-Moliner, 2019;Harris & Dean, 2003;Lages, 2006;Rokers et al, 2018;Welchman et al, 2004), that is underestimating , because the target position would have been perceived more advanced than it actually was, leading to earlier responses. However, not only is speed in depth underestimated with respect to lateral movement (Brenner, Van Den Berg, & Van Damme, 1997;Brooks & Stone, 2006;Rushton & Duke, 2009;Welchman, Lam, & Bulthoff, 2008), but its discrimination thresholds are also known to be higher relative to fronto-parallel speed (Aguado & López-Moliner, 2019) which makes more difficult to discriminate the different speeds for larger angles of approach. This explanation would be consistent with the fact that position variability becomes increasingly similar across speeds when MID is more present in the delayed effect condition.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Moreover, speed discrimination thresholds are usually higher for MID than for lateral motion (Aguado & López-Moliner, 2019;Rushton & Duke, 2009)). It has also been shown that differences in perceived speed depend on which part of the retina is stimulated (Brooks & Mather, 2000;Murdison, Leclercq, Lefèvre, & Blohm, 2019) and well known biases in the perceived spatial trajectories (Aguado & López-Moliner, 2019;Harris & Dean, 2003;Lages, 2006;Murdison et al, 2019;Rokers, Fulvio, Pillow, & Cooper, 2018;Welchman, Tuck, & Harris, 2004) or in motion extent in depth (Lages, 2006). The variability in the perception of MID, including speed and direction, makes it worth studying the performance of response timing when dealing with objects moving in depth.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several monocular and binocular cues both retinal and extra-retinal contribute to the perception of speed in MID, which is difficult and prone to individual differences (Brenner, van den Berg, & van Damme, 1996). Moreover, speed discrimination thresholds are usually higher for MID than for lateral motion (Aguado & López-Moliner, 2019;Rushton & Duke, 2009)). It has also been shown that differences in perceived speed depend on which part of the retina is stimulated (Brooks & Mather, 2000;Murdison, Leclercq, Lefèvre, & Blohm, 2019) and well known biases in the perceived spatial trajectories (Aguado & López-Moliner, 2019;Harris & Dean, 2003;Lages, 2006;Murdison et al, 2019;Rokers, Fulvio, Pillow, & Cooper, 2018;Welchman, Tuck, & Harris, 2004) or in motion extent in depth (Lages, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Motion-in-depth effects on interceptive timing errors in an immersive enviornment

López‐Moliner

Malla

2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We often need to interact with targets that move along arbitrary trajectories in the 3D scene. In these situations, information of parameters like speed, time-to-contact, or motion direction is required to solve a broad class of timing tasks (e.g., shooting, or interception). There is a large body of literature addressing how we estimate different parameters when objects move both in the fronto-parallel plane and in depth. However, we do not know to which extent the timing of interceptive actions is affected when there is MID involved. Unlike previous studies that have looked at the timing of interceptive actions using constant distances and fronto-parallel motion, we here use immersive virtual reality to look at how differences in the above-mentioned variables influence timing errors in a shooting task performed in a 3D environment. Participants had to shoot at targets that moved following different angles of approach with respect to the observer when those reached designated shooting locations. We recorded the shooting time, the temporal and spatial errors and the head’s position and orientation in two conditions that differed in the interval between the shot and the interception of the target’s path. Results show a consistent change of the temporal error across approaching angles: the larger the angle, the earlier the error. Interestingly, we also found different error patterns within a given angle that depended on whether participants tracked the whole target’s trajectory or only its end-point. These differences had larger impact when the target moved in depth and are consistent with underestimating motion-in-depth in the periphery. We conclude that the strategy participants use to track the trajectory interacts with MID and affects timing performance.

show abstract

“…In principle, there are many different ways these binocular and monocular signals could be combined with each other (and with other non-visual sources of self-motion informationsee Ernst & Banks, 2002;Fetsch et al, 2010;Landy et al, 1995;Perrone, 2018;van den Berg & Brenner, 1994). For example, there have been several recent attempts to model how various binocular, or monocular and binocular, motion-in-depth signals are integrated using Bayesian or maximum likelihood estimation frameworks (Allen et al, 2015;Aguado & López-Moliner, 2019;Welchman, Lam, & Bulthoff, 2008;Thompson, Rokers, & Rosenberg, 2019). While these particular studies were focussed on object-motion perception, their findingsthat motion-in-depth cues combine according to cue reliability under some conditionsmay generalize to self-motion perception as well.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The stereoscopic advantage for vection persists despite reversed disparity

Palmisano

Nakamura

Allison

et al. 2020

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research has shown that consistent stereoscopic information improves the vection (i.e. illusions of self-motion) induced in stationary observers. This study investigates the effects of placing stereoscopic information into direct conflict with monocular motion signals by swapping the observer's left and right eye views to reverse disparity. Experiments compared the vection induced by stereo-consistent, stereo-reversed and flat-stereo patterns of: (1) same-size optic flow, which contained monocular motion perspective information about self-motion, and (2) changing-size optic flow, which provided additional monocular information about motion-in-depth based on local changes in object image sizes. As expected, consistent stereoscopic information improved the vection-in-depth induced by both changing-size and same-size patterns of optic flow. Unexpectedly, stereoreversed patterns of same-size optic flow also induced stronger vection-in-depth than flat-stereo patterns of same-size optic flow. The effects of stereo-consistent and stereo-reversed information on vection strength were found to correlate reliably with their effects on perceived motion-in-depth and motion after-effect durations, but not with their effects on perceived scene depth. This suggests that stereo-consistent and stereo-reversed advantages for vection were both due to effects on perceived motion-in-depth. The current findings clearly demonstrate that stereoscopic information does not need to be consistent with monocular motion signals in order to improve vection. When taken together with past findings, they suggest that stereoscopic information only needs to be dynamic (as opposed to static) in order to improve vection-in-depth.

show abstract

Perceived speed of motion in depth modulates misjudgements of approaching trajectories consistently with a slow prior

Cited by 5 publications

References 36 publications

Object speed perception during lateral visual self-motion

Object speed perception during lateral visual self-motion

Motion-in-depth effects on interceptive timing errors in an immersive enviornment

The stereoscopic advantage for vection persists despite reversed disparity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About