Literature DB >> 8041584

Asymmetries in the sensitivity to motion in depth: a centripetal bias.

M Edwards1, D R Badcock.   

Abstract

It is reasonable to ask whether observers are more sensitive to the pattern of image motion caused by forward locomotion through the environment than to the pattern caused by backward locomotion. The distribution of sensitivities of cells in MT does show such a bias, although this bias is minimal at small eccentricities. Additionally, both locomotion-induced stimulation and the sensitivities of MT cells suggest greater sensitivity should be obtained in the lower visual field. Previous research on this issue has usually employed frontoparallel motion in patterns presented to one side of the fixation point. Both centrifugal and centripetal biases have been obtained. In this study the stimuli present motion signals that travel radially from (or towards) the fixation point. These stimuli, which produce a strong percept of motion in depth, are an adaptation of the global-dot-motion stimulus employed by Newsome and Pare. With these stimuli we find that sensitivity to motion in depth is greater in the lower visual field than in the upper visual field, and that sensitivity is greater to centripetal motion than to either centrifugal or frontoparallel motion. This centrifugal bias in sensitivity decreases with eccentricity. The last two findings contradict the notion that the bias is produced by the visual experience induced by normal forward locomotion and also that the detection of motion in depth is subserved by MT.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8041584     DOI: 10.1068/p221013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Perception        ISSN: 0301-0066            Impact factor:   1.490


  19 in total

1.  Early development of sensitivity to radial motion at different speeds.

Authors:  Nobu Shirai; So Kanazawa; Masami K Yamaguchi
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2007-10-30       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Directional anisotropy of motion responses in retinotopic cortex.

Authors:  Mathijs Raemaekers; Martin J M Lankheet; Sanne Moorman; Zoe Kourtzi; Richard J A van Wezel
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 5.038

3.  Motion-form interactions beyond the motion integration level: evidence for interactions between orientation and optic flow signals.

Authors:  Andrea Pavan; Rosilari Bellacosa Marotti; George Mather
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2013-05-31       Impact factor: 2.240

4.  Decreasing perceived optic flow rigidity increases postural sway.

Authors:  Vivian Holten; Stella F Donker; Frans A J Verstraten; Maarten J van der Smagt
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2013-05-10       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Motion anisotropies and heading detection.

Authors:  M Lappe; J P Rauschecker
Journal:  Biol Cybern       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 2.086

6.  Perception of complex motion in humans and pigeons (Columba livia).

Authors:  Jean-François Nankoo; Christopher R Madan; Marcia L Spetch; Douglas R Wylie
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2014-02-26       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Asymmetric perception of radial expansion/contraction in Japanese macaque (Macaca fuscata) infants.

Authors:  Nobu Shirai; Tomoko Imura; Yuko Hattori; Ikuma Adachi; Shigeru Ichihara; So Kanazawa; Masami K Yamaguchi; Masaki Tomonaga
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-12-30       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  The what and why of perceptual asymmetries in the visual domain.

Authors:  A K M Rezaul Karim; Haruyuki Kojima
Journal:  Adv Cogn Psychol       Date:  2010-12-15

9.  Face-sex categorization is better above fixation than below: Evidence from the reach-to-touch paradigm.

Authors:  Genevieve L Quek; Matthew Finkbeiner
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 3.526

10.  Why is the sunny side always up? Explaining the spatial mapping of concepts by language use.

Authors:  Stephanie C Goodhew; Bethany McGaw; Evan Kidd
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2014-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.