Literature DB >> 20089892

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

Stuart Jackson1, Randolph Blake.   

Abstract

Recent computational models of biological motion perception operate on ambiguous two-dimensional representations of the body (e.g., snapshots, posture templates) and contain no explicit means for disambiguating the three-dimensional orientation of a perceived human figure. Are there neural mechanisms in the visual system that represent a moving human figure's orientation in three dimensions? To isolate and characterize the neural mechanisms mediating perception of biological motion, we used an adaptation paradigm together with bistable point-light (PL) animations whose perceived direction of heading fluctuates over time. After exposure to a PL walker with a particular stereoscopically defined heading direction, observers experienced a consistent aftereffect: a bistable PL walker, which could be perceived in the adapted orientation or reversed in depth, was perceived predominantly reversed in depth. A phase-scrambled adaptor produced no aftereffect, yet when adapting and test walkers differed in size or appeared on opposite sides of fixation aftereffects did occur. Thus, this heading direction aftereffect cannot be explained by local, disparity-specific motion adaptation, and the properties of scale and position invariance imply higher-level origins of neural adaptation. Nor is disparity essential for producing adaptation: when suspended on top of a stereoscopically defined, rotating globe, a context-disambiguated "globetrotter" was sufficient to bias the bistable walker's direction, as were full-body adaptors. In sum, these results imply that the neural signals supporting biomotion perception integrate information on the form, motion, and three-dimensional depth orientation of the moving human figure. Models of biomotion perception should incorporate mechanisms to disambiguate depth ambiguities in two-dimensional body representations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20089892      PMCID: PMC2819284          DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3116-09.2010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosci        ISSN: 0270-6474            Impact factor:   6.167


  55 in total

1.  Brain areas involved in perception of biological motion.

Authors:  E Grossman; M Donnelly; R Price; D Pickens; V Morgan; G Neighbor; R Blake
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 3.225

2.  Brain Areas Active during Visual Perception of Biological Motion.

Authors:  Emily D Grossman; Randolph Blake
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2002-09-12       Impact factor: 17.173

3.  Active versus passive processing of biological motion.

Authors:  Ian M Thornton; Ronald A Rensink; Maggie Shiffrar
Journal:  Perception       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 1.490

4.  The dynamics of visual adaptation to faces.

Authors:  David A Leopold; Gillian Rhodes; Kai-Markus Müller; Linda Jeffery
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2005-05-07       Impact factor: 5.349

5.  Differential cortical processing of local and global motion information in biological motion: an event-related potential study.

Authors:  Masahiro Hirai; Ryusuke Kakigi
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2008-12-15       Impact factor: 2.240

6.  Size and position invariance of neuronal responses in monkey inferotemporal cortex.

Authors:  M Ito; H Tamura; I Fujita; K Tanaka
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  How does adaptation to disparity affect the perception of reversible figures?

Authors:  J P Harris
Journal:  Am J Psychol       Date:  1980-09

8.  Visual receptive fields of neurons in inferotemporal cortex of the monkey.

Authors:  C G Gross; D B Bender; C E Rocha-Miranda
Journal:  Science       Date:  1969-12-05       Impact factor: 47.728

9.  Perception of biological motion in parietal patients.

Authors:  Lorella Battelli; Patrick Cavanagh; Ian M Thornton
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 3.139

10.  Rapid perceptual switching of a reversible biological figure.

Authors:  Stuart Jackson; Fred Cummins; Nuala Brady
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2008-12-18       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  13 in total

1.  A new technique for generating disordered point-light animations for the study of biological motion perception.

Authors:  Jejoong Kim; Eunice L Jung; Sang-Hun Lee; Randolph Blake
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2015-08-01       Impact factor: 2.240

Review 2.  Can biological motion research provide insight on how to reduce friendly fire incidents?

Authors:  Kylie A Steel; David Baxter; Sera Dogramaci; Stephen Cobley; Eathan Ellem
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2016-10

3.  Bodily movement of approach is detected faster than that of receding.

Authors:  Hirokazu Doi; Kazuyuki Shinohara
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2012-10

4.  Biological motion cues trigger reflexive attentional orienting.

Authors:  Jinfu Shi; Xuchu Weng; Sheng He; Yi Jiang
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2010-09-29

5.  Spatial selectivity in adaptation to gaze direction.

Authors:  Colin J Palmer; Colin W G Clifford
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2022-08-10       Impact factor: 5.530

6.  The effect of looming and receding sounds on the perceived in-depth orientation of depth-ambiguous biological motion figures.

Authors:  Ben Schouten; Nikolaus F Troje; Jean Vroomen; Karl Verfaillie
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-02-23       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Opposite influence of perceptual memory on initial and prolonged perception of sensory ambiguity.

Authors:  Maartje Cathelijne de Jong; Tomas Knapen; Raymond van Ee
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-01-25       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Soccer athletes are superior to non-athletes at perceiving soccer-specific and non-sport specific human biological motion.

Authors:  Thomas Romeas; Jocelyn Faubert
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-09-03

9.  Integration of 3D structure from disparity into biological motion perception independent of depth awareness.

Authors:  Ying Wang; Yi Jiang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-02-21       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Individual differences in the perception of biological motion and fragmented figures are not correlated.

Authors:  Eunice L Jung; Asieh Zadbood; Sang-Hun Lee; Andrew J Tomarken; Randolph Blake
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2013-10-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.