Literature DB >> 21945995

Evidence for a subtractive component in motion adaptation.

M J Morgan1, C Chubb, J A Solomon.   

Abstract

Adaptation to a moving stimulus changes the perception of a stationary grating and also reduces contrast sensitivity to the adaptor. We determined whether the first effect could be predicted from the second. The contrast discrimination (T vs. C) function for a drifting 7.5 Hz grating test stimulus was determined when observers were adapted to a low contrast (0.075) grating of the same spatial and temporal frequency, moving in either the same or the opposite direction as the test. The effect of an adaptor moving in the same direction was to move the T vs. C function upwards and to the right, in a manner consistent with an increase in divisive inhibition. We also measured the effect of adaptation on the motion-null point for a counterphasing grating containing two components, one moving in the same direction as the adaptor and the other in the opposite direction. Adaptation increased the amount of contrast of the adapted component required to achieve the motion-null point. However, this shift could not be predicted from the effects of adaptation on contrast sensitivity. In particular, the balance point was shifted in gratings of high contrast where there was no effect of adaptation on contrast discrimination. We suggest that adaptation has a subtractive (recalibration) effect in addition to its effects on the contrast transduction function, and that this subtractive effect may explain the movement after-effect seen with stationary tests.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21945995     DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2011.09.002

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


  5 in total

1.  Wohlgemuth was right: distracting attention from the adapting stimulus does not decrease the motion after-effect.

Authors:  Michael J Morgan
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2011-07-31       Impact factor: 1.886

2.  Sustained attention is not necessary for velocity adaptation.

Authors:  Michael Morgan
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2013-07-31       Impact factor: 2.240

3.  Low-level mediation of directionally specific motion aftereffects: Motion perception is not necessary.

Authors:  M J Morgan; K Schreiber; J A Solomon
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 2.199

4.  A bias-minimising measure of the influence of head orientation on perceived gaze direction.

Authors:  Tarryn Balsdon; Colin W G Clifford
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-01-31       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  What is the primary cause of individual differences in contrast sensitivity?

Authors:  Daniel H Baker
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-07-26       Impact factor: 3.240

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.