Literature DB >> 7900288

Motion aftereffect with flickering test patterns reveals higher stages of motion processing.

S Nishida1, T Sato.   

Abstract

A series of experiments was conducted to clarify the distinction between motion aftereffects (MAEs) with static and counterphasing test patterns (static and flicker MAEs). It was found that while the motion of higher-order structure, such as areas defined by texture, flicker, or stereoscopic depth, induces little static MAE, such motion reliably generates flicker MAE. It was also found that static and flicker MAEs were induced in opposite directions for stimuli in which first- and second-order structures moved in opposite directions (compound graftings of 2f + 3f or 2f + 3f + 4f, shifting a half cycle of 2f). When the test was static, MAE was induced in the direction opposite to the first-order motion; but when the test was counterphasing, MAE was induced in the direction opposite to the second-order motion. This means that static MAE is predominantly induced by first-order motion, but that flicker MAE is affected strongly by second-order motion, along with first-order motion. The present results suggest that static MAE primarily reflects adaptation of a low-level motion mechanism, where first-order motion is processed, while flicker MAE reveals a high-level motion processing, where both first- and second-order motion signals are available.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7900288     DOI: 10.1016/0042-6989(94)00144-b

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


  20 in total

1.  Induced motion at texture-defined motion boundaries.

Authors:  A Johnston; C P Benton; P W McOwan
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  1999-12-07       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Second-order motion without awareness: passive adaptation to second-order motion produces a motion aftereffect.

Authors:  David Whitney; David W Bressler
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2007-01-10       Impact factor: 1.886

3.  Two distinct visual motion mechanisms for smooth pursuit: evidence from individual differences.

Authors:  Jeremy B Wilmer; Ken Nakayama
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2007-06-21       Impact factor: 17.173

4.  Position shifts following crowded second-order motion adaptation reveal processing of local and global motion without awareness.

Authors:  Thomas D Harp; David W Bressler; David Whitney
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2007-07-20       Impact factor: 2.240

5.  Default perception of high-speed motion.

Authors:  Mark Wexler; Andrew Glennerster; Patrick Cavanagh; Hiroyuki Ito; Takeharu Seno
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-04-09       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 6.  The motion aftereffect reloaded.

Authors:  George Mather; Andrea Pavan; Gianluca Campana; Clara Casco
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2008-10-24       Impact factor: 20.229

7.  Contrast detection in infants with fragile X syndrome.

Authors:  F Farzin; D Whitney; R J Hagerman; S M Rivera
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2008-05-23       Impact factor: 1.886

8.  Limited interaction between translation and visual motion aftereffects in humans.

Authors:  Benjamin T Crane
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-10-14       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Dynamic Object Representations in Infants with and without Fragile X Syndrome.

Authors:  Faraz Farzin; Susan M Rivera
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2010-03-02       Impact factor: 3.169

10.  Dynamics of spatial distortions reveal multiple time scales of motion adaptation.

Authors:  Neil W Roach; Paul V McGraw
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2009-10-07       Impact factor: 2.714

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.