Coding of visual stimulus velocity in area MT of the macaque

Rodman, Hillary R.; Albright, Thomas D.

doi:10.1016/0042-6989(87)90118-0

Cited by 231 publications

(163 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

150

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…First, it has been discovered that damage to certain areas of the human brain produces severe deficits in the perception of motion but has little effect on the perception of form (e. g. , Hess et al , 1989;Zihl et al , 1983; see Botez, 1975 for examples of lesions that affect form perception but do not affect motion perception). Second, physiological recordings of cell responses to stimuli have revealed many neurons that are highly sensitive to stimulus movement but are not affected by the color, the size, or the shape of stimuli (e. g. , Albright, 1984;Albright et al , 1984;Dubner & Zeki, 1971;Maunsell & van Essen, 1983b;Rodman & Albright, 1987;Zeki, 1974). Third, anatomical evidence reveals patterns of neural connectivity that appear to define an anatomical pathway for processing motion.…”

Section: The Motion Pathway In Visionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Third, physiological evidence supports the existence of at least two predominantly independent anatomical pathways in the visual system, one of which is sensitive to movement but not to form (e. g. , Botez, 1975;Livingstone & Hubel, 1988;Maunsell & Newsome, 1987;Ungerleider & Mishkin, 1982). For example, many cells located late in this pathway are very sensitive to movement, regardless of stimulus shape, size, or contrast (e. g. , Albright, 1984;Albright, Desimone, & Gross, 1984;Dubner & Zeki, 1971;Maunsell & van Essen, 1983b;Rodman & Albright, 1987;Zeki, 1974). Furthermore, lesions in this area produce significant deficits in motion perception but do not appear to affect object perception (Hess, Baker, & Zihl, 1989; Newsome & Pare, 1988; Newsome, Wurtz, Dursteler, & Mikami, 1985;Zihl, von Cramon, & Mai, 1983).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The how and why of what went where in apparent motion: Modeling solutions to the motion correspondence problem.

Dawson

1991

Psychological Review

167

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:A model that is capable of maintaining the identities of individuated elements as they move is described. It solves a particular problem of underdetermination, the motion correspondence problem, by simultaneously applying 3 constraints: the nearest neighbor principle, the relative velocity principle, and the element integrity principle. The model generates the same correspondence solutions as does the human visual system for a variety of displays, and many of its properties are consistent with what is known about the physiological mechanisms underlying human motion perception. The model can also be viewed as a proposal of how the identities of attentional tags are maintained by visual cognition, and thus it can be differentiated from a system that serves merely to detect movement. PDF Image: PDF Full Text Database: PsycARTICLESThe How Nevin-Meadows, Don Schopflocher, and Nancy Digdon at the University of Alberta. Comments from Dennis Proffitt and an anonymous reviewer on an earlier version of the manuscript were also extremely useful. I would like to acknowledge Brian Harder, who died during the past year. He began work on this research with me and performed numerous simulation runs and prepared many of the figures.Correspondence may be addressed to: Michael R. W. Dawson, Department of Psychology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2E9 Canada. Electronic mail may be sent to mike@psych.ualberta.ca.Many researchers have described the goal of visual perception as the construction of useful representations about the world (e. g. , Horn, 1986;Marr, 1976Marr, , 1982Ullman, 1979). These representations are derived from the information projected from a three-dimensional visual world (the distal stimulus) onto an essentially twodimensional surface of light receptors in the eyes. The interpretation of the distal stimulus must be determined from the resulting pattern of retinal stimulation (the proximal stimulus).However, the information represented in the proximal stimulus cannot, by itself, completely determine the nature of the distal stimulus. This is because the proximal stimulus does not preserve the full dimensionality of the physical world. The mapping from three-dimensional patterns to two-dimensional patterns is a many-to-one mapping and is not uniquely invertible (see Gregory, 1970;Horn, 1986;Marr, 1982;Richards, 1988). Retinal stimulation geometrically underdetermines interpretations of the physical world. 1Underdetermination can also result because the information available from local measurements of the proximal stimulus is consistent with a large number of different global interpretations. Alone, the local measurements are not sufficient to determine which global interpretation is correct. One example of this is the aperture problem: local measurements of a contour's movement do not by themselves specify the contour's true velocity (e. g. , Hildreth, 1983;Marr & Ullman, 1981). Another example is the stereo correspondence problem: local measurements do not by themselves specify which proxim...

show abstract

Section: The Motion Pathway In Visionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The how and why of what went where in apparent motion: Modeling solutions to the motion correspondence problem.

Dawson

1991

Psychological Review

167

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, the study of the neural mechanisms that underpin the perception of speed has also tended to focus on the role played by V5/MT. In nonhuman primates, V5/MT neuronal activity encodes speed information (Maunsell and Van Essen, 1983;Rodman and Albright, 1987;Lagae et al, 1993;Perrone and Thiele, 2001;Priebe et al, 2003;Priebe and Lisberger, 2004;Newsome, 2005, 2006;Nover et al, 2005;Krekelberg et al, 2006a,b) and lesions to this area bring about deficits in speed perception (Newsome and Paré, 1988;Orban et al, 1995). In the human brain, speed-dependent activity has been reported in V5/ MTϩ (Chawla et al, 1998;Huk and Heeger, 2000), but not consistently across studies (Sunaert et al, 2000).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Induced Deficits in Speed Perception by Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation of Human Cortical Areas V5/MT+ and V3A

McKeefry¹,

Burton²,

Vakrou³

et al. 2008

Journal of Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this report, we evaluate the role of visual areas responsive to motion in the human brain in the perception of stimulus speed. We first identified and localized V1, V3A, and V5/MTϩ in individual participants on the basis of blood oxygenation level-dependent responses obtained in retinotopic mapping experiments and responses to moving gratings. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) was then used to disrupt the normal functioning of the previously localized visual areas in each participant. During the rTMS application, participants were required to perform delayed discrimination of the speed of drifting or spatial frequency of static gratings. The application of rTMS to areas V5/MT and V3A induced a subjective slowing of visual stimuli and (often) caused increases in speed discrimination thresholds. Deficits in spatial frequency discrimination were not observed for applications of rTMS to V3A or V5/MTϩ. The induced deficits in speed perception were also specific to the cortical site of TMS delivery. The application of TMS to regions of the cortex adjacent to V5/MT and V3A, as well as to area V1, produced no deficits in speed perception. These results suggest that, in addition to area V5/MTϩ, V3A plays an important role in a cortical network that underpins the perception of stimulus speed in the human brain.

show abstract

“…There is now considerable evidence that the primate brain contains extrastriate areas that are specialized in the processing of motion information. This evidence comes from anatomical (Spatz and Tigges, 1972;Spatz, 1977;Seltzer and Pandya, 1978;Ungerleider and Desimone, 1986;Boussaoud et al, 1990), neurophysiological (Maunsell and van Essen, 1983;Albright, 1984;Mikami et al, 1986a,b;Saito et al, 1986;Tanaka et al, 1986;Rodman and Albright, 1987;Snowden et al, 1992), and behavioral studies (Newsome et al, 1985;Newsome and Pare, 1988) in monkey brain. Selective destruction of pathways from parvo-and magnocellular laminae of the lateral geniculate nucleus in the thalamus suggest that, already at early stages of visual processing, information about the form and color of visual stimuli might be separated from information about motion and flicker (Maunsell et al, 1990;Schiller et al, 1990;Merigan et al, 1991).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual short-term memory of stimulus velocity in patients with unilateral posterior brain damage

Greenlee¹,

Lang²,

Mergner³

et al. 1995

J. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Neurophysiological studies indicate the existence of an area in the extrastriate monkey cortex specialized for the processing of stimulus motion. The present investigation was conducted to determine whether a homologous area exits in the human cortex that underlies the processing and short-term storage of velocity information. Contrast detection and velocity discrimination thresholds were measured in a group of 23 patients with unilateral focal damage to either the lateral occipital, temporal, or posterior parietal cortex. Their results were compared to those of 23 age-matched control subjects. Detection and discrimination thresholds were determined for spatially truncated sinewave gratings presented 4 degrees eccentric of fixation randomly in either the left and right visual fields. Contrast detection thresholds were measured in a spatial two-alternative forced-choice paradigm for three different drift rates (1, 2, and 4 Hz) for leftward and rightward drift directions. Simultaneous velocity discrimination thresholds were determined for reference and test gratings presented 4 degrees left and right of fixation. Sequential velocity discrimination thresholds were measured using a delay, with a interstimulus interval (ISIs) of 1, 3, and 10 sec. In a subset of five patients with superior temporal lobe damage, spatial frequency discrimination thresholds for stationary gratings were also determined. The results indicate the following: (1) contrast detection thresholds for drifting gratings did not significantly differ between the patient and control groups; (2) velocity discrimination thresholds were significantly elevated in the patients; (3) velocity discrimination thresholds significantly increased with increasing ISI in the patients; (4) velocity discrimination thresholds were elevated most when the patients had a lesion in the superior temporal cortex; (5) in the subgroup of five patients with superior temporal lobe damage, spatial frequency discrimination thresholds were not significantly elevated. The results suggest that there is a visual area in the human posterior temporal cortex that is involved in the processing and short-term storage of the velocity of moving visual stimuli.

show abstract

Coding of visual stimulus velocity in area MT of the macaque

Cited by 231 publications

References 29 publications

The how and why of what went where in apparent motion: Modeling solutions to the motion correspondence problem.

The how and why of what went where in apparent motion: Modeling solutions to the motion correspondence problem.

Induced Deficits in Speed Perception by Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation of Human Cortical Areas V5/MT+ and V3A

Visual short-term memory of stimulus velocity in patients with unilateral posterior brain damage

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About