No abstract

Illusory line motion (ILM) refers to a motion illusion in which a flash at one end of a bar prior to the bar's instantaneous presentation or removal results in the percept of motion. While some theories attribute the origin of ILM to attention or early perceptual mechanisms, others have proposed that ILM results from impletion mechanisms that reinterpret the static bar as one in motion. The current functional magnetic resonance imaging study examined participants while they made decisions about the direction of motion in which a bar appeared to be removed. Preceding the instantaneous removal of the bar with a flash at one end resulted in a motion percept away from the flash. If this flash and the bar's removal overlapped in time, it appeared that the bar was removed towards the flash (reverse ILM). Independent of the motion type, brain responses indicated activations in areas associated with motion (MT+), endogenous and exogenous attention (intraparietal sulcus, frontal eye fields, and ventral frontal cortex), and response selection (ACC). ILM was associated with lower percept scores and higher activations in ACC relative to real motion, but no differences in shape-selective areas emerged. This pattern of brain activation is consistent with the attentional gradient model or bottom-up accounts of ILM in preference to impletion.

Four experiments are reported in which the effects of peripheral cues on visual orienting were investigated.In the luminance condition, the cues consisted of a peripheral change in stimulus luminance. In the isoluminance condition, the cues consisted of an isoluminant color change, using the transient tritanopic technique. In Experiments 1 and 2, it was found that peripheral luminance cues captured attention, whereas peripheral isoluminance cues did not. In Experiments 3 and 4, the participants detected a peripheral target that was also isoluminant with the background. Under these conditions, it was found that both luminance and isoluminance cues captured attention. The results are discussed in terms of the roles of the dorsal and ventral streams in visual orienting, and it is concluded that our findings provide partial support for the contingent involuntary orienting hypothesis of C. Folk and colleagues.

The spatial cueing paradigm, with saccades to targets as the method of response, was used to investigate the influence of two simultaneously presented cues on the orienting of visual attention. Participants were presented with bilateral cues, one of which was perceptually salient (high luminance) relative to the other. They participated in one of three conditions: in the 'bright side likely' condition targets usually (p =.8) appeared near the more salient cue; in the 'dim side likely' condition targets usually (p =.8) appeared near the less salient cue; and in the 'neutral' condition the arrangement of the cues was uninformative with respect to target location. Brief SOAs (0, 50, 100 and 150 ms) were employed. Rapid reflexive orienting to the more salient stimulus was observed in the neutral condition: saccadic latencies were faster when the target appeared near the bright cue, and this was found even across the two shortest SOAs. However, this reflexive orienting was suppressed in both the bright side likely and dim side likely conditions: the advantage observed at the bright cue's location across the two shortest SOAs in the neutral condition was significantly attenuated in the two contingent conditions. Results point to rapid expectancy-based interference in the reflexive process of attention capture.

A complex neural problem must be solved before a voluntary eye movement is triggered away from a stimulus (antisaccade). The location code activated by a stimulus must be internally translated into an appropriate signal to direct the eyes into the opposite visual field, while the reflexive tendency to look directly at the stimulus must be suppressed. No doubt these extra processes contribute to the ubiquitous slowing of antisaccades. However, there is no consensus on the cognitive mechanisms that contribute to the antisaccade programme. Visual attention is closely associated with the generation of saccadic eye movements and it has been shown that attention will track an illusion of line motion. A series of experiments combined this illusion with a saccadic eye movement that was congruent (i.e. directed towards), or incongruent with (i.e. direct away from), a peripheral target. Experiment 1 showed that congruent saccades had faster reaction times than incongruent saccades. In contrast, Experiments 2 and 3 demonstrated that, with illusory line motion, incongruent saccades now had faster reaction times than congruent saccades. These findings demonstrate that an illusory phenomenon can accelerate the processing of an incongruent relative to a congruent saccade.