Literature DB >> 8116276

Monocular discrimination of the direction of motion in depth.

D Regan1, S Kaushal.   

Abstract

The direction of motion in depth of a monocularly-viewed rigid sphere can be quantified in terms of the distance by which the sphere's centre will miss the centre of the pupil of the observing eye. If we express this distance as ns (where s is the sphere's radius and n is a scaling factor), then n approximates the ratio (d phi/dt)/(d theta/dt) between the translational velocity (d phi/dt) and the rate of expansion (d theta/dt) of the object's retinal image. To use this monocular information alone as a basis for motor action, prior knowledge of s would be necessary. (However, the value of s is available from binocular information, so that the distance by which the sphere's centre would miss the eye is, in principle, available from retinal image information alone and, in particular, without knowing the object's size or distance from the eye). We measured the just-discriminable difference in the direction of motion in depth for a monocularly-viewed simulated object. Thresholds were measured for trajectories contained within the horizontal, vertical and two oblique meridia. The translational speed of the retinal image was removed as a reliable cue to the direction of motion in depth by randomly varying the simulated object's speed on a trial to trial basis. The direction of translational motion was also removed as a reliable cue. Discrimination threshold for the stimulated direction of motion ranged from 0.03 to 0.12 deg for our seven subjects, and did not vary appreciably with the direction of motion relative to the line of sight over the range investigated, nor did it depend on whether trajectory was contained within the horizontal, vertical or oblique meridia. We conclude that subjects are able monocularly to discriminate differences in the direction of motion in depth, even when both the direction and speed of retinal image translation are removed as reliable cues.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8116276     DOI: 10.1016/0042-6989(94)90329-8

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


  21 in total

1.  Modelling the control of interceptive actions.

Authors:  P J Beek; J C Dessing; C E Peper; D Bullock
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2003-09-29       Impact factor: 6.237

2.  Collision judgment of objects approaching the head.

Authors:  E Poljac; B Neggers; A V van den Berg
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2005-12-03       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Lateral ball interception: hand movements during linear ball trajectories.

Authors:  Ryan Arzamarski; Steven J Harrison; Alen Hajnal; Claire F Michaels
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 4.  Visuo-motor coordination and internal models for object interception.

Authors:  Myrka Zago; Joseph McIntyre; Patrice Senot; Francesco Lacquaniti
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-01-13       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Discriminating direction of motion trajectories from angular speed and background information.

Authors:  Zheng Bian; Myron L Braunstein; George J Andersen
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 2.199

6.  Controlling speed and direction during interception: an affordance-based approach.

Authors:  Julien Bastin; Brett R Fajen; Gilles Montagne
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-12-01       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Changes in angular size and speed affect the judged height of objects moving over a ground surface.

Authors:  Junjun Zhang; Myron L Braunstein; George J Andersen
Journal:  Perception       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 1.490

8.  Hazard Detection by Drivers with Paracentral Homonymous Field Loss: A Small Case Series.

Authors:  Bronstad P Matthew; Alex R Bowers; Amanda Albu; Robert B Goldstein; Eli Peli
Journal:  J Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2011-12-06

9.  Driving with central field loss I: effect of central scotomas on responses to hazards.

Authors:  P Matthew Bronstad; Alex R Bowers; Amanda Albu; Robert Goldstein; Eli Peli
Journal:  JAMA Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 7.389

10.  Collision judgment when using an augmented-vision head-mounted display device.

Authors:  Gang Luo; Russell L Woods; Eli Peli
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2009-05-20       Impact factor: 4.799

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.