Literature DB >> 10793897

A model of the perceived relative positions of moving objects based upon a slow averaging process.

B Krekelberg1, M Lappe.   

Abstract

We extend the local energy model of position detection to cope with temporally varying position signals and the perception of relative position. The extension entails two main components. First, a form of persistence for the position signal based on the temporal impulse response function of the visual system. Secondly, we hypothesise that the perceived relative position of two objects is determined by a slow average of the difference of the objects' position signals. The model explains why briefly flashed static dots are perceived to lag behind continuously visible moving dots, without the need for a motion extrapolation process [Nijhawan, R. (1994). Nature, 370, 256-257]. The dependence of this illusion on parameters such as the velocity, duration, frequency and number of flashes of the motion trajectories is accurately captured by the model. Furthermore, the model makes two predictions. First, briefly flashed dots on a staircase trajectory should lead dots with a long duration. Secondly, it should be possible to abolish the lag-effect between continuously visible and stroboscopically moving objects by halting the continuously visible dots during the interflash interval of the stroboscopic dots. Both predictions are corroborated in experiments.

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10793897     DOI: 10.1016/s0042-6989(99)00168-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vision Res        ISSN: 0042-6989            Impact factor:   1.886


  15 in total

1.  The influence of visual motion on perceived position.

Authors:  David Whitney
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2002-05-01       Impact factor: 20.229

2.  The perceived position of moving objects: transcranial magnetic stimulation of area MT+ reduces the flash-lag effect.

Authors:  Gerrit W Maus; Jamie Ward; Romi Nijhawan; David Whitney
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2012-02-02       Impact factor: 5.357

3.  Perceptual compression of space through position integration.

Authors:  Barrie W Roulston; Matt W Self; Semir Zeki
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2006-10-07       Impact factor: 5.349

4.  Motion signals bias localization judgments: a unified explanation for the flash-lag, flash-drag, flash-jump, and Frohlich illusions.

Authors:  David M Eagleman; Terrence J Sejnowski
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2007-03-13       Impact factor: 2.240

5.  Perceptual uncertainty and line-call challenges in professional tennis.

Authors:  George Mather
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2008-07-22       Impact factor: 5.349

6.  Stimulus dependence of the flash-lag effect.

Authors:  Christopher R L Cantor; Clifton M Schor
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2007-09-14       Impact factor: 1.886

7.  Faster processing of moving compared with flashed bars in awake macaque V1 provides a neural correlate of the flash lag illusion.

Authors:  Manivannan Subramaniyan; Alexander S Ecker; Saumil S Patel; R James Cotton; Matthias Bethge; Xaq Pitkow; Philipp Berens; Andreas S Tolias
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2018-08-22       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  The buzz-lag effect.

Authors:  Cristiano Cellini; Lisa Scocchia; Knut Drewing
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-06-07       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Temporal integration of focus position signal during compensation for pursuit in optic flow.

Authors:  Jacob Duijnhouwer; Bart Krekelberg; Albert van den Berg; Richard van Wezel
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2010-12-09       Impact factor: 2.240

10.  The flash grab effect.

Authors:  Patrick Cavanagh; Stuart Anstis
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2013-07-18       Impact factor: 1.886

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.