Does attention cause illusory line motion?

Christie, John; Klein, Raymond M.

doi:10.3758/bf03193629

Cited by 31 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…ILM is thought to result from exogenously oriented attention but not endogenously oriented attention (Christie, 2014;Christie & Klein, 2005), which is consistent with the larger prior entry benefits associated with exogenous attention over that of endogenous attention (Shore, Spence, & Klein, 2001). These prior entry benefits of attention are thought to reduce as a function of distance (Laberge, 1983), resulting in a gradient of perceptual onsets that replicate the low-level signal of a bar in motion (Hikosaka et al, 1993a(Hikosaka et al, , 1993b(Hikosaka et al, , 1993c.…”

Section: Brief Overview Of Illusory Line Motionmentioning

confidence: 50%

“…This is called polarized gamma motion (Kanizsa, 1979), although in similar displays von Grünau and Faubert (1994) referred to this as motion induction. Although the presented object may be of any shape (Kanizsa, 1979), for convenience and to coincide with the current study and recent literature (Christie & Barresi, 2002;Christie & Klein, 2005;Crawford et al, 2010;Crawford, Kean, Klein, & Hamm, 2006;Downing & Treisman, 1997;Hamm et al, 2014;Hamm & Klein, 2002;Hikosaka, Miyauchi, & Shimojo, 1993a, 1993b, 1993cvon Grünau & Faubert, 1994), the object that undergoes illusory motion is referred to as the bar, because this object is generally rectangular with the motion directed along the long axis. The existing object that induces the illusory motion in the bar is referred to as the box, because the inducing object is typically a solid square.…”

Section: Brief Overview Of Illusory Line Motionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, exogenously captured attention has been shown to be associated with the conscious perception of near threshold targets (Chica, Lasaponara, Lupianez, Doricchi, & Bartolomeo, 2010) further indicating that the prior-entry benefits are not simply a response bias but actually influence the conscious perception time of stimuli. Importantly, when the term attention is used within this study it should be taken to refer only to exogenous attention as endogenous attention appears not to produce ILM (Christie, 2014;Christie & Klein, 2005).…”

Section: Brief Overview Of Illusory Line Motionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, in some studies the illusion was scored simply as the percentage of responses that indicate motion away from the box (Corballis et al, 2002;Hikosaka et al, 1993c;von Grünau & Faubert, 1994). Sometimes a subjective rating scale was used, where participants were asked to rate the strength of their motion perception (Christie, 2014;Christie & Klein, 2005). Luminance gratings (von Grünau, Racette, et al, 1996) have been used to produce presumed perceptual asymmetries resulting in motion in the opposite direction until a point of subjective equality is found, quantifying the illusion in terms of the luminance grating.…”

Section: Quantification Of Ilmmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Illusory line motion in onset and offset bars

Han

Zhu

Corballis

et al. 2016

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Illusory line motion (ILM) refers to the perception of motion in a bar that is presented all at once next to an inducing stimulus. The experimental methods for producing and quantifying ILM are varied, and the resulting explanations are likewise at odds. The current study examined the explanations for ILM away from the inducing stimulus (bright or dark flash) using bars that either suddenly appear (onset bars) or suddenly disappear (offset bars). Real motion is used to cancel ILM, providing three measures to quantify ILM: the consistency of responding to only ILM in the absence of real motion; the distance between the points of subjective equality between ILM and the real motion; and the area between the curves relating perception of motion to the real and illusory conditions. ILM quantities for onset and offset bars are strongly correlated when the bar change occurs after the flash. However, onset bars presented during the flash do not show any evidence of ILM, whereas offset bars removed during the flash result in reverse ILM (rILM). Moreover, rILM and ILM are not correlated, suggesting they reflect two separate illusions. These results are consistent over the various measures of ILM.Keywords Attention . Illusory line motion . Motion perception Forms of illusory line motion (ILM) have been investigated since the early 1900s. There have been a number of paradigms employed, and the phenomenon has been quantified in different ways. As a result, a range of explanations has been offered. This variety, while providing a rich source of data, presents its own problems. Primarily, the lack of consistency in protocols and measurements makes it difficult to know if the results arising from one study are relevant to a study using different methods or measuring different quantities. One cannot be sure they are examining the same underlying phenomena. What follows is not so much an attempt to determine which explanations of illusory line motion are supported or valid and which can be dismissed or rejected, but rather a presentation that attempts to determine what findings warrant a common explanation and what findings can be argued to be reflective of a different illusory phenomenon. After coverage of the literature illustrating the variations of methods, we focused primarily on illusory line motion that occurs following a brief luminance change and made recommendations with respect to experimental methods, quantification of ILM, and data analyses.

show abstract

Section: Brief Overview Of Illusory Line Motionmentioning

confidence: 50%

Section: Brief Overview Of Illusory Line Motionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Brief Overview Of Illusory Line Motionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Quantification Of Ilmmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Illusory line motion in onset and offset bars

Han

Zhu

Corballis

et al. 2016

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This distinction is crucial to understanding the effects of central and peripheral cuing. For example, it has been demonstrated that when attention is triggered and maintained using central cues, it does not induce the illusory line motion (Christie & Klein, 2005). However, maintaining or removing endogenous attention from a location where attention has been exogenously triggered (using a peripheral cue) does modulate the illusion, which is nevertheless generated only by exogenous peripheral cues (Chica, Charras, & Lupiáñez, 2008).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial attention and conscious perception: the role of endogenous and exogenous orienting

Chica

Lasaponara

Chanes

et al. 2011

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Attention has often been considered to be a gateway to consciousness (Posner, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 91(16), 7398-7403, 1994). However, its relationship with conscious perception (CP) remains highly controversial. While theoretical models and experimental data support the role of attention in CP (Chica, Lasaponara, Lupiáñez, Doricchi, & Bartolomeo, NeuroImage, 51, 1205-1212, 2010; Dehaene, Changeux, Naccache, Sackur, & Sergent, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 204-211, 2006; Mack & Rock, Inattentional blindness, 1998), recent studies have claimed that at least some forms of attention--endogenous or top-down spatial attention--are neither sufficient nor necessary for CP (Koch & Tsuchiya, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 16-22, 2007). In the present experiments, we demonstrate the importance of exogenously triggered attention for the modulation of CP. Weak or null effects were instead observed when attention was triggered endogenously. Our data are discussed in the framework of recent neuropsychological models (Dehaene et al., Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 204-211, 2006), postulating that activity within reverberating frontoparietal networks, as colocalized with spatial-orienting systems, is the brain correlate of consciously processed information

show abstract

Spatiotemporal Illusions Involving Perceived Motion

Hubbard

2019

The Illusions of Time

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Does attention cause illusory line motion?

Cited by 31 publications

References 27 publications

Illusory line motion in onset and offset bars

Illusory line motion in onset and offset bars

Spatial attention and conscious perception: the role of endogenous and exogenous orienting

Spatiotemporal Illusions Involving Perceived Motion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About