Attentional modulation of adaptation to two-component transparent motion

Lankheet, M.J.M.; Verstraten, Frans A. J.

doi:10.1016/0042-6989(95)98720-t

Cited by 129 publications

(93 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…While most previous psychophysical studies have found results concordant with those reported here (Blake and Hiris 1993; Lankheet and Verstraten 1995), one study found a somewhat different result. Raymond and Braddick (1996) used test stimuli similar to our own, but only 184 ms in duration.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 32%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Motion Adaptation in Area MT

Wezel

Britten

2002

Journal of Neurophysiology

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In many sensory systems, exposure to a prolonged stimulus causes adaptation, which tends to reduce neural responses to subsequent stimuli. Such effects are usually stimulus-specific, making adaptation a powerful probe into information processing. We used dynamic random dot kinematograms to test the magnitude and selectivity of adaptation effects in the middle temporal area (MT) and to compare them to effects on human motion discrimination. After 3 s of adaptation to a random dot pattern moving in the preferred direction, MT neuronal responses to subsequent test patterns were reduced by 26% on average compared with adaptation to a static pattern. This reduction in response magnitude was largely independent of what test stimulus was presented. However, adaptation in the opposite direction changed responses less often and very inconsistently. Therefore motion adaptation systematically and profoundly affects the neurons in MT representing the adapted direction, but much less those representing the opposite direction. In human psychophysical experiments, such adapting stimuli affected direction discrimination, biasing choices away from the adaptation direction. The magnitude of this perceptual shift was consistent with the magnitude of the changes seen in area MT, if one assumes that a motion comparison step occurs after MT.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 32%

“…We used an adaptation-test paradigm similar in concept to ones used in human psychophysical studies of motion perception (Blake and Hiris 1993;Lankheet and Verstraten 1995;Raymond and Braddick 1996). The dynamic random dot stimulus we employed is similar to the ones used by Newsome and colleagues (Britten et al 1992).…”

Section: Stimulimentioning

confidence: 99%

Motion Adaptation in Area MT

Wezel

Britten

2002

Journal of Neurophysiology

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recent research has revealed an effect of attentional modulations on the detection of motion or on motion aftereffects when two components of motion overlap (e.g., Lankheet & Verstraten, 1995). Kitazaki and Sato (2003) measured the effect of voluntary attention on vection direction with a display including upward and downward optical motion.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Compound self-motion perception induced by two kinds of optical motion

Ito¹,

Fujimoto²

2003

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Arman et al (2006) showed that the motion aftereffect is stronger for motion in an attended direction even when the test appears at a nonattended location, indicating enhancement of motion processing by selection of same-direction motion signals. In a similar vein, Lankheet and Verstraten (1995) elicited a motion aftereffect in a direction opposite to an attended motion layer, even when the stimulus motion was balanced by showing two clouds of dots moving in opposite directions. However, it is unclear whether feature-based attention modulates involuntary eye-movements, since recent research indicates that perception and slow eye movements rely on partially different networks or on information arising from the same networks but read out in different ways (Simoncini et al 2012;Spering and Carrasco 2012;Spering and Gegenfurtner 2007b;Spering et al 2011;Tavassoli and Ringach 2010).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Ocular tracking responses to background motion gated by feature-based attention

Souto

Kerzel

2014

Journal of Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In contrast to spatial attention, we know little about the role of feature-based attention in determining this ocular response. To probe feature-based effects of background motion on involuntary eye movements, we presented human observers with a balanced background perturbation. Two clouds of dots moved in opposite vertical directions while observers tracked a target moving in horizontal direction. Additionally, they had to discriminate a change in the direction of motion (Ϯ10°from vertical) of one of the clouds. A vertical ocular following response occurred in response to the motion of the attended cloud. When motion selection was based on motion direction and color of the dots, the peak velocity of the tracking response was 30% of the tracking response elicited in a single task with only one direction of background motion. In two other experiments, we tested the effect of the perturbation when motion selection was based on color, by having motion direction vary unpredictably, or on motion direction alone. Although the gain of pursuit in the horizontal direction was significantly reduced in all experiments, indicating a trade-off between perceptual and oculomotor tasks, ocular responses to perturbations were only observed when selection was based on both motion direction and color. It appears that selection by motion direction can only be effective for driving ocular tracking when the relevant elements can be segregated before motion onset. smooth pursuit eye movements; feature-based attention; attention; motion; eye movements A CENTRAL QUESTION IN UNDERSTANDING how perception and action may be articulated is whether perceptual selection and eye movement control rely on similar filtering mechanisms (for a review Kowler 2007;Schutz et al. 2011). Involuntary ocular tracking eye movements offer a good opportunity for understanding early filtering mechanisms given that their initiation can involve relatively few processing steps (for a review, see Masson and Perrinet 2012).Among involuntary tracking eye movements, ocular following is a quasireflexive response to motion covering a large part of the visual field (Kawano 1999;Miles et al. 1986), which is believed to reflect the unfolding of visual motion processing, providing a window on the link between neural computation and behavior (Ilg 1997;Lisberger et al. 1987;Masson and Perrinet 2012). Ocular following depends on first-order motion signals, with little input from higher order motion processing (Hayashi et al. 2008), suggesting that attention may have a minor role. However, this latter aspect is poorly understood, especially in relation to feature-based attention, the ability to select a specific feature dimension (e.g., motion, color, and shape), or value (upward vs. downward motion) across the visual field. In the context of voluntary and involuntary tracking eye movements, feature-based attention may have a role in helping integrate motion information across space, as for tracking surfaces occluded by objects in the foreground (e.g., Grossberg 1998; Mestre a...

show abstract

Attentional modulation of adaptation to two-component transparent motion

Cited by 129 publications

References 48 publications

Motion Adaptation in Area MT

Motion Adaptation in Area MT

Compound self-motion perception induced by two kinds of optical motion

Ocular tracking responses to background motion gated by feature-based attention

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About