Skip to content
Free planNo credit card requiredStart writing
AI for Research home
AI for Research home
Dashboard
Sign inGet started

Search 250 million research papers

Read the abstract, see who wrote it and who cites it, and get the citation in APA, MLA, Chicago or Harvard.

About 10,000 papers for “visual motion”

Visual motion

Adrian Goycoolea (4462207) · Figshare · 1998

Cited by 0Open access

Visual Motion Perception

Kathleen A. Turano · 2000

Abstract : In operations of aircraft control or target acquisition, the misperception of motion could produce serious errors in a pilot's performance. Little is known about the human observer's ability to accurately judge the velocity of motion while navigating through an environment containing moving objects or while making eye movements. If we can understand how the perception of motion is affected by the presence of moving objects in the environment or by eye movements, we can then specify viewing requirements based on the perceptual cost/benefits. In this project, the human observer's ability to judge velocity was investigated in two sets of experiments. In the first set of experiments the ability to judge self motion in an environment containing moving objects was investigated using simulated optic flow displays. The effects of object and observer velocity on the ability to discriminate between curvilinear and rectilinear self motion were determined. In the second set of experiments, the ability to judge object velocity while making smooth pursuit eye movements was investigated. The effects of stimulus velocity, size, and eccentricity on velocity perception were determined. The findings from the eye movement experiments led to the development of a model that explains how eye velocity signals combine with visual motion signals to determine the perception of motion.

Cited by 4

Visual Motion Perception

Shimon Ullman · Birkhäuser Boston eBooks · 1988

Visual motion provides useful information about the surrounding environment, and this information is extracted and used by biological visual systems in a variety of tasks. Sophisticated mechanisms for extracting and utilizing visual motion are found even in simple animals. For example, the frog has efficient "bug detection" mechanisms that respond selectively to small dark objects moving in its visual field. The ordinary housefly can track moving objects and can discover the relative motion between a target and its background when the two are identical in texture and therefore indistinguishable in the absence of relative motion. Visual motion is also used in the guidance of locomotion and the control of body motion. Another remarkable use of visual motion is the interpretation of structure from motion, which is the recovery of three-dimensional shape using motion information alone. This capacity has been demonstrated in the classical studies of H. Wallach and D.N. O'Connell, in which an unfamiliar object was rotated behind a translucent screen and its shadow projection observed from the other side of the screen. The viewers were able to give a correct description of the hidden object's three-dimensional structure and motion in Space, even when each static view was unrecognizable and contained no three-dimensional information.KeywordsVisual MotionMotion PerceptionMotion MeasurementHide ObjectApparent Motion PhenomenonThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Cited by 2

Visual Motion Perception

Jeremy M. Wolfe, Dennis M. Levi, Lori L. Holt et al. · Oxford University Press eBooks · 2024

This chapter explores the intricate mechanisms of motion perception, emphasizing its significance as a primary perceptual dimension. It begins with motion aftereffects, such as the waterfall illusion, illustrating how direction-specific neural adaptations in the brain can create an illusory sense of movement in stationary objects. It explains the computation of visual motion through neural circuits that detect directional changes, addressing challenges like the aperture problem and showing how the middle temporal area (MT) integrates signals to resolve the global motion. Practical applications of motion information include navigation using optic flow and timing collisions via tau, while biological motion enables humans to interpret dynamic actions and intentions. The development of motion perception highlights the gradual maturation of motion sensitivity, from early reflexive eye movements in infancy to complex motion-processing capabilities in adulthood.

Cited by 0

Visual Motion Perception

George Sperling · 1989

Abstract : The articles enclosed with this report describe work related to five aspects of visual information processing: (1) Continuing studies of two separate motion-computation systems in human vision and the derivation of the functional properties of each. (2) The investigation of three dimensional structure derived from two dimensional visual inputs. (3) A potent form of spatial contrast-gain- control was discovered and found to be not only frequency selective but also orientation specific. This form of local gain control may exemplify a universal form of neural normalization. (4) Studies of human pattern recognition of familiar shapes (such as letters) show that its statistical efficiency approaches an incredible 50% of the ideal detector's efficiency when the pattern is spatially bandpass filtered in a band whose wavelength is of the same order as the pattern itself. (5) Studies of real and simulated saccadic eye movements in which the same sequence of images that is produced on the retina during saccadic eye movements is artificially produced on a stationary retina.

Cited by 0

Visual Motion Aftereffect

2015

The effect of the motion insert direction on the perceived vMAE direction for naïve participants was not reliable because of either misunderstanding the directions or not knowing how to interpret the vMAE. The naïve subjects produced a result inverted relative to that from the Alias & Blake (1999). Further training with the vMAE may bring responses closer to that of Alias & Blake (1999).

Cited by 0

Visual Motion Survey

Swethasri Dravida, Rebecca Saxe, Marina Bedny · PsycTESTS Dataset · 2013

Cited by 0

Auditory motion capturing ambiguous visual motion.

Alink, A., Euler, F., Galeano, E. et al. · Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics · 2012

In this study, it is demonstrated that moving sounds have an effect on the direction in which one sees visual stimuli move. During the main experiment sounds were presented consecutively at four speaker locations inducing left or rightward auditory apparent motion. On the path of auditory apparent motion, visual apparent motion stimuli were presented with a high degree of directional ambiguity. The main outcome of this experiment is that our participants perceived visual apparent motion stimuli that were ambiguous (equally likely to be perceived as moving left or rightward) more often as moving in the same direction than in the opposite direction of auditory apparent motion. During the control experiment we replicated this finding and found no effect of sound motion direction on eye movements. This indicates that auditory motion can capture our visual motion percept when visual motion direction is insufficiently determinate without affecting eye movements.

Cited by 0

Auditory Motion Capturing Ambiguous Visual Motion

Arjen Alink, Felix Euler, Elena Galeano et al. · Frontiers in Psychology · 2012

In this study, it is demonstrated that moving sounds have an effect on the direction in which one sees visual stimuli move. During the main experiment sounds were presented consecutively at four speaker locations inducing left or rightward auditory apparent motion. On the path of auditory apparent motion, visual apparent motion stimuli were presented with a high degree of directional ambiguity. The main outcome of this experiment is that our participants perceived visual apparent motion stimuli that were ambiguous (equally likely to be perceived as moving left or rightward) more often as moving in the same direction than in the opposite direction of auditory apparent motion. During the control experiment we replicated this finding and found no effect of sound motion direction on eye movements. This indicates that auditory motion can capture our visual motion percept when visual motion direction is insufficiently determinate without affecting eye movements.

Cited by 18Open access

Visual motion aftereffect from understanding motion language

Alexia Toskos Dils, Lera Boroditsky · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2010

Do people spontaneously form visual mental images when understanding language, and if so, how truly visual are these representations? We test whether processing linguistic descriptions of motion produces sufficiently vivid mental images to cause direction-selective motion adaptation in the visual system (i.e., cause a motion aftereffect illusion). We tested for motion aftereffects (MAEs) following explicit motion imagery, and after processing literal or metaphorical motion language (without instructions to imagine). Intentionally imagining motion produced reliable MAEs. The aftereffect from processing motion language gained strength as people heard more and more of a story (participants heard motion stories in four installments, with a test after each). For the last two story installments, motion language produced reliable MAEs across participants. Individuals differed in how early in the story this effect appeared, and this difference was predicted by the strength of an individual's MAE from imagining motion. Strong imagers (participants who showed the largest MAEs from imagining motion) were more likely to show an MAE in the course of understanding motion language than were weak imagers. The results demonstrate that processing language can spontaneously create sufficiently vivid mental images to produce direction-selective adaptation in the visual system. The timecourse of adaptation suggests that individuals may differ in how efficiently they recruit visual mechanisms in the service of language understanding. Further, the results reveal an intriguing link between the vividness of mental imagery and the nature of the processes and representations involved in language understanding.

Cited by 102Open access

Can Implicit Auditory Motion Affect Visual Motion?

Lara Krisst, Daw‐An Wu, Shinsuke Shimojo · Journal of Vision · 2023

Research on multisensory integration reveals an intricate interplay of information between distinct sensory channels. Less is known regarding cases where the information in one of the channels is inaccessible to awareness. While previous research has shown that audio motion can modify the perception of visual motion (Hidaka et al., 2011; Shams et al., 2004), we examine whether this is also the case when the audio motion is implicit. Participants are probed about the direction of visual motion in a random dot kinematogram (RDK), while a subliminal audio tone is presented binaurally, simulating a horizontal right to left (or vice versa) auditory motion sweep. Participants reported the precise (0-360 range) direction of visual motion by clicking a mouse button after a 1200 ms stimulus presentation. Performance is quantified as the response error (the angular difference between the true motion direction and participants' reported motion direction) using a two-parameter mixture model. Audio motion was masked by noise (implicit) in one condition and unmasked in the other (explicit). In both conditions, audio and visual motion was presented in either the same direction (congruent) or the opposite direction (incongruent). Comparing the explicit vs implicit conditions, preliminary results (N=5) showed a decrease in representational precision and an increase in guess rate in the explicit compared to the implicit condition. Results also showed a decrease in precision for the incongruent vs. congruent direction in both conditions, a finding that was trending but not significant. This suggests that the visual information is subject to more noise when audio is explicit, and that audio congruency may exert effects on vision regardless of the audio’s conscious accessibility.

Cited by 0Open access

Auditory motion affects visual biological motion processing

A. Brooks A, A. Billard C, B. Petreska C et al. · 2008

The processing of biological motion is a critical, everyday task performed with remarkable efficiency by human sensory systems. Interest in this ability has focused to a large extent on biological motion processing in the visual modality (see, for example, Cutting, J. E., Moore, C., & Morrison, R. (1988). Masking the motions of human gait. Perception and Psychophysics, 44(4), 339–347). In naturalistic settings, however, it is often the case that biological motion is defined by input to more than one sensory modality. For this reason, here in a series of experiments we investigate behavioural correlates of multisensory, in particular audiovisual, integration in the processing of biological motion cues. More specifically, using a new psychophysical paradigm we investigate the effect of suprathreshold auditory motion on perceptions of visually defined biological motion. Unlike data from previous studies investigating audiovisual integration in linear motion processing [Meyer, G. F. & Wuerger, S. M. (2001). Cross-modal integration of auditory and visual motion signals. Neuroreport, 12(11), 2557–2560; Wuerger, S. M., Hofbauer, M., & Meyer, G. F. (2003). The integration of auditory and motion signals at threshold. Perception and Psychophysics, 65(8), 1188–1196; Alais, D. & Burr, D. (2004). No direction-specific bimodal facilitation for audiovisual motion detection. Cognitive Brain Research, 19, 185–194], we report the existence of direction-selective effects: relative to control (stationary) auditory conditions, auditory motion in the same direction as

Cited by 0

Rotational self-motion inhibits opposed visual motion

Kate Pickard, Sujin Kim, Robert Keys et al. · Journal of Vision · 2023

Distinguishing whether retinal motion is caused by self-motion or external motion is essential for effectively interacting with the world and the brain combines vestibular, proprioceptive, and re-afferent motor signals to determine this. This study seeks to better understand how visual and vestibular rotation signals interact in motion perception. In Study1, participants wore a virtual reality headset while seated, turning their heads either right, left or staying stationary while judging whether a visual stimulus translated left or right. Thresholds for this task were measured by varying the signal-to-noise ratio of the motion stimulus. When head-turn and retinal motion were congruent (both left, or both right) thresholds did not differ from the stationary condition. However, when head-turn and retinal motion were incongruent (opposed directions), thresholds were elevated. In Study 2, the visual motion was presented at various angles between horizontal and vertical to determine the relationship between the head-turn and visual motion trajectories. Results replicated those of study 1 in that opposed head-turn and retinal motion directions produced elevated thresholds, but congruent directions did not. There was no clear angular tuning for relative motion trajectory. These results may be explained by known visual-vestibular interactions in area MSTd, where only incongruently tuned visual-vestibular cells have been found for rotation. Such cells could serve to detect unwanted reafferent signals produced by head rotations and suppress them from perception, explaining elevated thresholds for visual motions opposed to head-turn direction.

Cited by 0Open access

Auditory Motion Elicits a Visual Motion Aftereffect

Christopher C. Berger, H. Henrik Ehrsson · Frontiers in Neuroscience · 2016

The visual motion aftereffect is a visual illusion in which exposure to continuous motion in one direction leads to a subsequent illusion of visual motion in the opposite direction. Previous findings have been mixed with regard to whether this visual illusion can be induced cross-modally by auditory stimuli. Based on research on multisensory perception demonstrating the profound influence auditory perception can have on the interpretation and perceived motion of visual stimuli, we hypothesized that exposure to auditory stimuli with strong directional motion cues should induce a visual motion aftereffect. Here, we demonstrate that horizontally moving auditory stimuli induced a significant visual motion aftereffect-an effect that was driven primarily by a change in visual motion perception following exposure to leftward moving auditory stimuli. This finding is consistent with the notion that visual and auditory motion perception rely on at least partially overlapping neural substrates.

Cited by 14Open access

Visual Search for Motion

I. Scofield, Eriko Self · Journal of Vision · 2011

This experiment explores aspects of attention and visual search using a motion paradigm. The classic visual search paradigm has been used to develop a popular theory of attention (Treisman & Gelade, 1980). This study measures the ability to search for and discriminate moving stimuli as similarity of stimuli varies by average shared shapes between target and distractors (Sun & Shevell, 2009). The aim of this study was to see how reaction times for visual conjunctive search were affected by the role of object shapes. The stimulus was a random dot kinematogram consisting of a central region and four flanking peripheral regions. The distractor regions consisted of a central region and three out of the four peripheral regions, in these distractor regions red shapes move upward and green shapes move downward. The target region consisted of one of the four peripheral regions, in the target region the red shapes move downward and the green shapes move upward. The speed of motion was 14.1°/sec. The observer's 4 AFC task was to judge which one of the four peripheral regions was the target. The results from five observers showed that as average shared shape percentage of target and distractor areas increases, the observer's reaction times increases. The mean reaction times for average shared shapes of 0%, 25%, 50% and 100% were 1.74 sec (SEM = 0.10), 2.46 sec (SEM = 0.11), 3.91 sec (SEM = 0.19) and 4.32 sec (SEM = 0.33) respectively. A one-way ANOVA with repeated measures showed that this difference in reaction time was significant, F(3, 12) = 16.703, p < .001. Future research will examine how performance on visual search for motion is affected by other variables including color, object size and object density.

Cited by 0Open access