If a bar suddenly appears between 2 squares after 1 of the squares flashes the bar appears to shoot away from the flashed square toward the other. This occurs despite the bar actually having been presented all at once. This illusory motion is sufficiently strong to cancel real motion drawn in the opposite direction. One explanation for the illusion in these displays is based upon the prior entry benefits generated by exogenous attention at the flashed location. These prior entry benefits can be offset by real motion in the opposite direction, which enables 1 to quantify the illusion based upon the area between the response curves following left and right flashes. The influence of attention can be quantified as the costs plus benefits during an exogenous cuing study involving target discrimination. The current study required participants to complete motion direction discrimination trials and a set of target discrimination trials following noninformative peripheral cues. If attention is involved in the motion illusion during these displays then those who show large effects of attention during cuing should also show large illusions. Correlation analyses confirmed a positive relationship existed between the costs plus benefits of exogenous attention and the illusory motion. (PsycINFO Database Record

Illusory line motion (ILM) refers to perceived motion in a bar when it is presented all at once. Explanations for ILM include lowlevel visual accounts, visual attention, and object tracking. These explanations tend to arise from studies using different protocols to induce ILM, based on the assumption that the same illusion is being generated. Using real motion in the same and in the opposite direction as the ILM quantifies the illusions from all protocols as the area between response curves for the left-and rightside inducers. This common measure enables testing of the assumption that two display configurations result in the same illusion. If there is a common underlying cause, an individual who shows a strong illusion in one situation should show a strong illusion in the other, but illusions that arise through different systems should not correlate. This approach has differentiated ILM induced by a flash (flash ILM) from ILM induced by matching the bar to an attribute of the inducing stimuli (transformational apparent motion, TAM). The former is thought to reflect attention, while the latter is thought to reflect object processing. Low-level visual explanations are often offered based on ILM that occurs when the bar is adjacent to only a single inducer (polarized gamma motion, PGM) rather than between two stimuli (flash ILM and TAM). The present study replicates the independence of flash ILM and TAM and shows that neither is related to PGM, suggesting that all three explanations for ILM are warranted and that the debates in the literature are conflating at least three different illusions.

In this paper we present ZenG, a neurofeedback AR application concept based on Zen Gardening to foster creativity, self-awareness, and relaxation through embodied interactions in a mixed reality environment. We developed an initial prototype which combined physiological sensing through EEG with AR visualisation on the Magic Leap Display. We evaluated the prototype through preliminary user testing with 12 adults. Results suggest users found the experience to be enjoyable and relaxing, however the application could be improved by including more features and functionality. ZenG shows the potential for AR to provide immersive and interactive environments that could promote creativity and relaxation, providing solid grounds for further research.