Journal
JOURNAL OF VISION
Volume 6, Issue 2, Pages 119-131Publisher
ASSOC RESEARCH VISION OPHTHALMOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1167/6.2.3
Keywords
motion aftereffect; binocular disparity; surface; depth order
Categories
Funding
- NEI NIH HHS [R01 EY014984, R01 EY014984-03, EY-014984] Funding Source: Medline
- NATIONAL EYE INSTITUTE [R01EY014984] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Despite evidence for concurrent processing of motion and stereopsis from psychophysics and neurophysiology, the detailed relationship between depth and motion processing is not yet clear. Using the contingent aftereffect paradigm, we investigated how the order of surfaces presented across depth influenced motion perception. After having observers adapt to two superimposed populations of dots moving in opposite directions at different binocular disparities, we assessed how much of the motion aftereffect ( MAE) was specific to absolute disparity and how much was specific to the depth order of the surfaces. The test contained two planes of moving dots at several different pairs of disparities and asked observers to report the MAE direction at one of the planes ( the target). In addition to the disparity-contingent MAE ( Verstraten, Verlinde, Fredericksen, & van de Grind, 1994), we found MAEs dependent on surface order. When the target surface was in front of another surface, observers more often reported the MAE in the direction opposite to the front adapting surface than the back. This effect was observed despite differences in absolute and relative disparity between the adapted and test surfaces. The results suggest that some motion information is represented in terms of surface depth order.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available