Literature DB >> 17997646

Detection of biological and nonbiological motion.

Eric Hiris1.   

Abstract

Often it is claimed that humans are particularly sensitive to biological motion. Here, sensitivity as a detection advantage for biological over nonbiological motion is examined. Previous studies comparing biological motion to nonbiological motion have not used appropriate masks or have not taken into account the underlying form present in biological motion. The studies reported here compare the detection of biological motion to nonbiological motion with and without form. Target animation sequences represented a walking human, an unstructured translation and rotation, and a structured translation and rotation. Both the number of mask dots and the size of the target varied across trials. The results show that biological motion is easier to detect than unstructured nonbiological motion but is not easier to detect than structured nonbiological motion. The results cannot be explained by learning over the course of data collection. Additional analyses show that mask density explains masking of different size target areas and is not specific to detection tasks. These data show that humans are not better at detecting biological motion compared to nonbiological motion in a mask. Any differences in detection performance between biological motion and nonbiological motion may be in part because biological motion always contains an underlying form.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17997646     DOI: 10.1167/7.12.4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vis        ISSN: 1534-7362            Impact factor:   2.240


  20 in total

1.  Experts see it all: configural effects in action observation.

Authors:  Beatriz Calvo-Merino; Shantel Ehrenberg; Delia Leung; Patrick Haggard
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2009-10-25

2.  Neural integration of information specifying human structure from form, motion, and depth.

Authors:  Stuart Jackson; Randolph Blake
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2010-01-20       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  Oxytocin enhances the perception of biological motion in humans.

Authors:  Szabolcs Kéri; György Benedek
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 3.282

Review 4.  Camouflage and visual perception.

Authors:  Tom Troscianko; Christopher P Benton; P George Lovell; David J Tolhurst; Zygmunt Pizlo
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2009-02-27       Impact factor: 6.237

5.  Unaffected perceptual thresholds for biological and non-biological form-from-motion perception in autism spectrum conditions.

Authors:  Ayse Pinar Saygin; Jennifer Cook; Sarah-Jayne Blakemore
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-10-18       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Normal form from biological motion despite impaired ventral stream function.

Authors:  S Gilaie-Dotan; S Bentin; M Harel; G Rees; A P Saygin
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2011-01-13       Impact factor: 3.139

7.  Self-organizing neural integration of pose-motion features for human action recognition.

Authors:  German I Parisi; Cornelius Weber; Stefan Wermter
Journal:  Front Neurorobot       Date:  2015-06-09       Impact factor: 2.650

8.  Bayesian integration of position and orientation cues in perception of biological and non-biological forms.

Authors:  Steven M Thurman; Hongjing Lu
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2014-02-24       Impact factor: 3.169

9.  Neuroanatomical correlates of biological motion detection.

Authors:  Sharon Gilaie-Dotan; Ryota Kanai; Bahador Bahrami; Geraint Rees; Ayse P Saygin
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2012-12-02       Impact factor: 3.139

10.  Do People "Pop Out"?

Authors:  Katja M Mayer; Quoc C Vuong; Ian M Thornton
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-10-06       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.