scholarly journals Perception of motion direction in Glass patterns with opposite contrast polarity dots

2004 ◽  
Vol 4 (8) ◽  
pp. 850-850
Author(s):  
M. M. Del ◽  
M. Gori
Keyword(s):  
Motion Direction ◽  
Contrast Polarity ◽  
Opposite Contrast ◽  
Glass Patterns

Some Observations on the Perception of Marroquin Patterns

Perception ◽  
1991 ◽  
Vol 20 (6) ◽  
pp. 727-731 ◽  
Author(s):  
David C Earle
Keyword(s):  
Stereoscopic Depth ◽  
Contrast Polarity ◽  
Pattern Structure ◽  
Opposite Contrast ◽  
Glass Patterns

Demonstrations are presented to show that the perception of structure in Marroquin patterns is disrupted if the dots comprising the pattern have opposite contrast polarity, and also if the dots comprising the pattern are separated in stereoscopic depth. It is also demonstrated that the perception of structure in a Marroquin pattern is made possible if the pattern is separated in stereoscopic depth from ‘noise’ dots, where the pattern structure cannot be perceived in either half of the unfused stereogram. In these respects the perception of Marroquin patterns is similar to the perception of Glass patterns. These findings are thus consistent with the proposal that the perception both of Marroquin and of Glass patterns is based on the construction of virtual lines.

scholarly journals The integration of local chromatic motion signals is sensitive to contrast polarity

2011 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 239-246 ◽  
Author(s):  
SOPHIE M. WUERGER ◽  
ALEXA RUPPERTSBERG ◽  
STEPHANIE MALEK ◽  
MARCO BERTAMINI ◽  
JASNA MARTINOVIC
Keyword(s):  
Random Motion ◽  
Coherent Motion ◽  
Global Motion ◽  
Local Motion ◽  
Chromatic Contrast ◽  
Motion Direction ◽  
Contrast Polarity ◽  
Motion Integration ◽  
Integration Mechanisms ◽  
Contrast Thresholds

AbstractGlobal motion integration mechanisms can utilize signals defined by purely chromatic information. Is global motion integration sensitive to the polarity of such color signals? To answer this question, we employed isoluminant random dot kinematograms (RDKs) that contain a single chromatic contrast polarity or two different polarities. Single-polarity RDKs consisted of local motion signals with either a positive or a negative S or L–M component, while in the different-polarity RDKs, half the dots had a positive S or L–M component, and the other half had a negative S or L–M component. In all RDKs, the polarity and the motion direction of the local signals were uncorrelated. Observers discriminated between 50% coherent motion and random motion, and contrast thresholds were obtained for 81% correct responses. Contrast thresholds were obtained for three different dot densities (50, 100, and 200 dots). We report two main findings: (1) dependence on dot density is similar for both contrast polarities (+S vs. −S, +LM vs. −LM) but slightly steeper for S in comparison to LM and (2) thresholds for different-polarity RDKs are significantly higher than for single-polarity RDKs, which is inconsistent with a polarity-blind integration mechanism. We conclude that early motion integration mechanisms are sensitive to the polarity of the local motion signals and do not automatically integrate information across different polarities.

scholarly journals Glass Patterns: Some Contrast Effects Re-Evaluated

Perception ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 253-268 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven C Dakin
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Filtering ◽  
Contrast Effects ◽  
Visual Grouping ◽  
Relative Contrast ◽  
Low Pass ◽  
Band Pass ◽  
Opposite Contrast ◽  
Low Pass Filters ◽  
Glass Patterns ◽  
High Pass

The relative contrast of features is known to be important in determining if they can be grouped. Two manipulations of feature contrast have previously been used to criticise models of visual grouping based on spatial filtering: high-pass filtering and reversal of contrast polarity. The effects of these manipulations are considered in the context of the perception of Glass patterns. It is shown that high-pass filtering elements, whilst destroying structure in the output of low-pass filters, do not significantly disrupt the output of locally band-pass filters. The finding that subjects can perceive structure in Glass patterns composed of high-pass features therefore offers no evidence against such spatial filtering mechanisms. Band-pass filtering models are shown to explain the rotation of perceived structure in Glass patterns composed of opposite contrast features. However, structure is correctly perceived in patterns composed of two ‘interleaved’ opposite contrast patterns, which is problematic for oriented filtering mechanisms. Two possible explanations are considered: nonlinear contrast transduction prior to filtering, and integration of local orientation estimates from first-order and second-order mechanisms.

scholarly journals Binocular Capture: The effects of mismatched Spatial frequency and opposite contrast polarity

2010 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. 368-368
Author(s):  
A. Raghunandan ◽  
S. Andrus ◽  
L. Nennig
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Frequency ◽  
Contrast Polarity ◽  
Opposite Contrast

Contrast Polarity Affects Performance after Figure-Ground Coding

Perception ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 26 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 243-243
Author(s):  
K J Linnell ◽  
G W Humphreys
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Psychology ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Human Perception ◽  
Opposite Polarity ◽  
Regular Polygons ◽  
Target Element ◽  
Dramatic Effect ◽  
Contrast Polarity ◽  
Search Experiment ◽  
Opposite Contrast

Gilchrist et al (1997 Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance23 464 – 480) proposed that some aspects of grouping are relatively insensitive to variations in contrast polarity between the elements to be grouped. We assessed the contrast-polarity sensitivity of grouping in a visual search experiment. Display elements were corner-brackets arranged at the vertices of regular polygons (see Donnelly et al, 1991 Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance17 561 – 570), either aligned with polygon sides (strong-grouping condition), rotated through 20° (weak-grouping condition), or rotated through 180° (open condition). The background was grey; on same-contrast-polarity trials, elements were either all white or all black; on opposite-polarity trials, each element was white and black. The task was to detect a target element rotated 180° with respect to the others. With weak grouping present, opposite contrast polarity slowed reaction times dramatically: they were as slow as those to open displays. A second experiment in which display elements were pacmen showed that the contrast-polarity effect on performance is modulated by figure - ground relations: the dramatic effect of contrast polarity in the weak-grouping condition disappeared, presumably because search focused on the uniform grey illusory surface. These results suggest that grouping operates automatically to produce figure - ground coding of displays, but that contrast polarity differences within a figural surface affect the output of these codes to systems concerned with perceptual discriminations.

scholarly journals The interaction between orientation and motion signals in moving oriented Glass patterns

2017 ◽  
Vol 34 ◽  
Author(s):  
ANDREA PAVAN ◽  
LUCY M. BIMSON ◽  
MARTIN G. GALL ◽  
FILIPPO GHIN ◽  
GEORGE MATHER
Keyword(s):  
Excitatory Input ◽  
Motion Sensors ◽  
Motion Information ◽  
Spatial Motion ◽  
Dipole Orientation ◽  
Motion Direction ◽  
Oriented Texture ◽  
Orientation Information ◽  
Glass Patterns ◽  
Perceived Motion

AbstractPrevious psychophysical evidence suggests that motion and orientation processing systems interact asymmetrically in the human visual system, with orientation information having a stronger influence on the perceived motion direction than vice versa. To investigate the mechanisms underlying this motion-form interaction we used moving and oriented Glass patterns (GPs), which consist of randomly distributed dot pairs (dipoles) that induce the percept of an oriented texture. In Experiment 1 we varied the angle between dipole orientation and motion direction (conflict angle). In separate sessions participants either judged the orientation or motion direction of the GP. In addition, the spatiotemporal characteristics of dipole motion were manipulated as a way to limit (Experiment 1) or favor (Experiment 2) the availability of orientation signals from motion (motion streaks). The results of Experiment 1 showed that apparent GP motion direction is attracted toward dipole orientation, and apparent GP orientation is repulsed from GP motion. The results of Experiment 2 showed stronger repulsion effects when judging the GP orientation, but stronger motion streaks from the GP motion can dominate over the signals provided by conflicting dipole orientation. These results are consistent with the proposal that two separate mechanisms contribute to our perception of stimuli which contain conflicting orientation and motion information: (i) perceived GP motion is mediated by spatial motion-direction sensors, in which signals from motion sensors are combined with excitatory input from orientation-tuned sensors tuned to orientations parallel to the axis of GP motion, (ii) perceived GP orientation is mediated by orientation-tuned sensors which mutually inhibit each other. The two mechanisms are revealed by the different effects of conflict angle and dipole lifetime on perceived orientation and motion direction.

Contrast Configuration Influences Grouping in Apparent Motion

Perception ◽  
10.1068/p3444 ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 669-685 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Ma-Wyatt ◽  
Colin W G Clifford ◽  
Peter Wenderoth
Keyword(s):  
Apparent Motion ◽  
Contrast Polarity ◽  
Ternus Display ◽  
Static Display ◽  
Stereo Display ◽  
Motion Responses ◽  
Group Motion ◽  
Similar Dependence ◽  
Opposite Contrast

We investigated whether the same principles that influence grouping in static displays also influence grouping in apparent motion. Using the Ternus display, we found that the proportion of group motion reports was influenced by changes in contrast configuration. Subjects made judgments of completion of these same configurations in a static display. Generally, contrast configurations that induced a high proportion of group motion responses were judged as more ‘complete’ in static displays. Using a stereo display, we then tested whether stereo information and T-junction information were critical for this increase in group motion. Perceived grouping was consistently higher for same contrast polarity configurations than for opposite contrast polarity configurations, regardless of the presence of stereo information or explicit T-junctions. Thus, while grouping in static and moving displays showed a similar dependence on contrast configuration, motion grouping showed little dependence on stereo or T-junction information.

scholarly journals Nonsymbolic numerosity in sets with illusory-contours exploits a context-sensitive, but contrast-insensitive, visual boundary formation process

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Adriano ◽  
Luca Rinaldi ◽  
Luisa Girelli
Keyword(s):  
Numerical Representation ◽  
Illusory Contours ◽  
Boundary Formation ◽  
Contrast Polarity ◽  
Context Sensitive ◽  
Visual Boundary ◽  
Brightness Enhancement ◽  
Texture Density ◽  
Numerical Discrimination ◽  
Opposite Contrast

AbstractThe visual mechanisms underlying approximate numerical representation are still intensely debated because numerosity information is often confounded with continuous sensory cues (e.g., texture density, area, convex hull). However, numerosity is underestimated when a few items are connected by illusory contours (ICs) lines without changing other physical cues, suggesting in turn that numerosity processing may rely on discrete visual input. Yet, in these previous works, ICs were generated by black-on-gray inducers producing an illusory brightness enhancement, which could represent a further continuous sensory confound. To rule out this possibility, we tested participants in a numerical discrimination task in which we manipulated the alignment of 0, 2, or 4 pairs of open/closed inducers and their contrast polarity. In Experiment 1, aligned open inducers had only one polarity (all black or all white) generating ICs lines brighter or darker than the gray background. In Experiment 2, open inducers had always opposite contrast polarity (one black and one white inducer) generating ICs without strong brightness enhancement. In Experiment 3, reverse-contrast inducers were aligned but closed with a line preventing ICs completion. Results showed that underestimation triggered by ICs lines was independent of inducer contrast polarity in both Experiment 1 and Experiment 2, whereas no underestimation was found in Experiment 3. Taken together, these results suggest that mere brightness enhancement is not the primary cause of the numerosity underestimation induced by ICs lines. Rather, a boundary formation mechanism insensitive to contrast polarity may drive the effect, providing further support to the idea that numerosity processing exploits discrete inputs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document