Spatio-Temporal Factors in Cessation of Smooth Apparent Motion

Lichtenstein, M.

doi:10.1364/josa.53.000304

Cited by 29 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The consequence of this process is a strong, bidirectional coupling between motion and position perception that provides a unifying account for a range of perceptual phenomena. These include motion-induced shifts in perceived position (3)(4)(5)(6), perceptual speed biases (20), slowing of motions shown in visual periphery (21,22), and the curveball illusion (16). The presented model also makes novel predictions about interactions between position and motion perception-predictions confirmed here.…”

Section: Significancesupporting

confidence: 63%

Unifying account of visual motion and position perception

Kwon

Tadin

Knill

2015

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

110

152

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite growing evidence for perceptual interactions between motion and position, no unifying framework exists to account for these two key features of our visual experience. We show that percepts of both object position and motion derive from a common object-tracking system-a system that optimally integrates sensory signals with a realistic model of motion dynamics, effectively inferring their generative causes. The object-tracking model provides an excellent fit to both position and motion judgments in simple stimuli. With no changes in model parameters, the same model also accounts for subjects' novel illusory percepts in more complex moving stimuli. The resulting framework is characterized by a strong bidirectional coupling between position and motion estimates and provides a rational, unifying account of a number of motion and position phenomena that are currently thought to arise from independent mechanisms. This includes motion-induced shifts in perceived position, perceptual slow-speed biases, slowing of motions shown in visual periphery, and the well-known curveball illusion. These results reveal that motion perception cannot be isolated from position signals. Even in the simplest displays with no changes in object position, our perception is driven by the output of an objecttracking system that rationally infers different generative causes of motion signals. Taken together, we show that object tracking plays a fundamental role in perception of visual motion and position.visual motion perception | Kalman filter | object tracking | causal inference | motion-induced position shift R esearch into the basic mechanisms of visual motion processing has largely focused on simple cases in which motion signals are fixed in space and constant over time (e.g., moving patterns presented in static windows) (1). Although this approach has resulted in considerable advances in our understanding of low-level motion mechanisms, it leaves open the question of how the brain integrates changing motion and position signals; when objects move in the world, motion generally co-occurs with changes in object position. The process of generating coherent estimates of object motion and position is known in the engineering and computer vision literature as "tracking" (e.g., as used by the Global Positioning System) (2). Conceptualizing motion and position perception in the broader context of object tracking suggests an alternative conceptual framework-one that we show provides a unifying account for a number of perceptual phenomena.An optimal tracking system would integrate incoming position and motion signals with predictive information from the recent past to continuously update perceptual estimates of both an object's position and its motion. Were such a system to underlie perception, position and motion should be perceptually coupled in predictable ways. Signatures of such a coupling appear in a number of known phenomena. On one hand, local motion signals can predictively bias position percepts (3-8). On the other hand, we can pe...

show abstract

Section: Significancesupporting

confidence: 63%

Unifying account of visual motion and position perception

Kwon

Tadin

Knill

2015

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

110

152

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(TREVARTHEN, 1968). Measurement of the velocity at which slowly displaced stimuli are just perceived as moving does not support this view, because the central movement threshold is found to be much lower than the peripheral (AUBERT, 1886(AUBERT, , 1887RUPPERT, 1908;LICHTENSTEIN, 1963), and the threshold gradient follows a smooth curve as a function of eccentricity. However, the highest velocity at which movement is detectable is greater for the peripheral than for central field (BHATIA, 1975) but, again, no qualitative distinction is apparent.…”

Section: Macular Central and Peripheral Visionmentioning

confidence: 94%

The Topography of Vision in Mammals of Contrasting Life Style: Comparative Optics and Retinal Organisation

Hughes¹

1977

Handbook of Sensory Physiology

609

785

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It seems reasonable to conclude, further, that the velocity system depends on receptive fields to detect motion and that the positional system uses a different mechanism. Lichtenstein (1963) used an ingenious system to present discontinuously moving lines on the face of an oscilloscope. He studied sensitivity to rather than the aftereffect of discontinuous motion, but some of his observations are of interest here.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discontinuity of seen motion reduces the visual motion aftereffect

Banks

Kane

1972

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Discontinuity of seen motion reduces the visual motion aftereffect*Would a motion-picture film of a rotating spiral induce a spiral aftereffect? This question was studied in two experiments in which Ss viewed an animated film of circles collapsing to a point. The rate of apparent motion of the collapsing circles and the discontinuity of motion-the length of jump between successively projected circles-were varied independently. A visual aftereffect like the spiral aftereffect was created. The aftereffect increased in strength and duration with the rate of motion, but at all rates of motion it declined as discontinuity of motion increased. The results are taken as evidence that motion aftereffects are caused by selective fatigue of small, directionally sensitive motion-receptive fields.

show abstract

Spatio-Temporal Factors in Cessation of Smooth Apparent Motion

Cited by 29 publications

References 1 publication

Unifying account of visual motion and position perception

Unifying account of visual motion and position perception

The Topography of Vision in Mammals of Contrasting Life Style: Comparative Optics and Retinal Organisation

Discontinuity of seen motion reduces the visual motion aftereffect

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About