A new transparent motion aftereffect

10.1038/10150 ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 2 (7) ◽  
pp. 595-596 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maarten J. van der Smagt ◽  
Frans A. J. Verstraten ◽  
Wim A. van de Grind
Keyword(s):  
Motion Aftereffect ◽  
Transparent Motion

scholarly journals A new form of motion aftereffect in transparent motion adaptation

2011 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 702-702
Author(s):  
A. L. F. Lee ◽  
H. Lu
Keyword(s):  
Motion Aftereffect ◽  
Motion Adaptation ◽  
Transparent Motion ◽  
New Form

A Transparent Motion Aftereffect Contingent on Binocular Disparity

Perception ◽  
1994 ◽  
Vol 23 (10) ◽  
pp. 1181-1188 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frans A J Verstraten ◽  
Reinder Verlinde ◽  
R Eric Fredericksen ◽  
Wim A van de Grind
Keyword(s):  
Binocular Disparity ◽  
Motion Aftereffect ◽  
Stimulus Configuration ◽  
Retinal Disparity ◽  
Transparent Motion ◽  
Stationary Test ◽  
Vector Sum ◽  
Moving Patterns

Under transparent motion conditions overlapping surfaces are perceived simultaneously, each with its own direction. The motion aftereffect (MAE) of transparent motion, however, is unidirectional and its direction is opposite to that of a sensitivity-weighted vector sum of both inducing vectors. Here we report a bidirectional and transparent MAE contingent on binocular disparity. Depth (from retinal disparity) was introduced between two patterns. A fixation dot was presented at zero disparity, that is, located between the two adaptation patterns. After adaptation to such a stimulus configuration testing was carried out with two stationary test patterns at the same depths as the preceding moving patterns. For opposite directions a clear transparent MAE was perceived. However, if the adaptation directions were orthogonal the chance of a transparent MAE being perceived decreased substantially. This was subject dependent. Some subjects perceived an orthogonal transparent MAE whereas others saw the negative vector sum—an integrated MAE. In addition the behaviour of the MAE when the distance in depth between adapting and test patterns was increased was investigated: it was found that the visibility of the MAE then decreased. Visibility is defined in this paper as: (i) the percentage of the trials in which MAEs are perceived and (ii) the average MAE duration. Both measures decreased with increasing distance. The results suggest that segregation and integration may be mediated by direction-tuned channels that interact with disparity-tuned channels.

scholarly journals The motion aftereffect of transparent motion: Two temporal channels account for perceived direction

2005 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 403-412 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Alais ◽  
Frans A.J. Verstraten ◽  
David C. Burr
Keyword(s):  
Motion Aftereffect ◽  
Transparent Motion

scholarly journals Nulling the motion aftereffect of transparent motion

2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 162-162
Author(s):  
F. A. J. Verstraten ◽  
R. J. A. Wezel
Keyword(s):  
Motion Aftereffect ◽  
Transparent Motion

PATHS OF SEEN MOTION AND MOTION AFTEREFFECT

1966 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 1003-1008 ◽  
Author(s):  
SHIGEMASA SUMI
Keyword(s):  
Motion Aftereffect

scholarly journals Through the Neural Magnifying Glass: Visual Acuity and Motion-Aftereffect

i-Perception ◽  
10.1068/ii48 ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
pp. 479-479
Author(s):  
S.C Boyle ◽  
R Jenkins ◽  
M Lages
Keyword(s):  
Visual Acuity ◽  
Motion Aftereffect

Apparent Velocity of Motion Aftereffects in Central and Peripheral Vision

Perception ◽  
1986 ◽  
Vol 15 (5) ◽  
pp. 603-612 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J Wright
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Time Course ◽  
Peripheral Vision ◽  
Temporal Frequency ◽  
Motion Aftereffect ◽  
Apparent Velocity ◽  
Real Motion ◽  
Temporal Decay ◽  
Spatial Grain ◽  
Motion Aftereffects

Adapting to a drifting grating (temporal frequency 4 Hz, contrast 0.4) in the periphery gave rise to a motion aftereffect (MAE) when the grating was stopped. A standard unadapted foveal grating was matched to the apparent velocity of the MAE, and the matching velocity was approximately constant regardless of the visual field position and spatial frequency of the adapting grating. On the other hand, when the MAE was measured by nulling with real motion of the test grating, nulling velocity was found to increase with eccentricity. The nulling velocity was constant when scaled to compensate for changes in the spatial ‘grain’ of the visual field. Thus apparent velocity of MAE is constant across the visual field, but requires a greater velocity of real motion to cancel it in the periphery. This confirms that the mechanism underlying MAE is spatially-scaled with eccentricity, but temporally homogeneous. A further indication of temporal homogeneity is that when MAE is tracked, by matching or by nulling, the time course of temporal decay of the aftereffect is similar for central and for peripheral stimuli.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document