2019
DOI: 10.1167/19.3.4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Time dilation effect in an active observer and virtual environment requires apparent motion: No dilation for retinal- or world-motion alone

Abstract: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Downloaded from jov.arvojournals.org on 07/31/2020 Journal of Vision (2019) 19(3):4, 1-8 Lo Verde et al.observer, moving stimulus (moving in the world, not on the retinae); MN, moving observer, stimulus in the opposite direction (stimulus moving in the world and on the retinae, in opposite direction). (B) Schematic representation of the virtual scene that was presented to the observers. A fixation cube was present at all time… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
2
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
2
1
Order By: Relevance
“…While the study provides evidence that motor imagery affects time perception, we would not go so far as to suggest perceptual and central processes do not play any role. Indeed, the present study did not replicate previously observed effects of optical flow on time estimation (Kanai et al, 2006) and reproduction (Verde et al, 2019). However, these previous studies measured time perception at the short-range interval, while the here-reported experiments used intervals between 7 and 16 s. Theories have long argued interval timing between 0 and 3 s differs from longer-range estimates (Münsterberg, 1889;Penney & Vaitilingam, 2008;Poppel, 2004), resulting in functional (Grondin, 2010) and neural dissociations (Wittmann, 2014).…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 99%
“…While the study provides evidence that motor imagery affects time perception, we would not go so far as to suggest perceptual and central processes do not play any role. Indeed, the present study did not replicate previously observed effects of optical flow on time estimation (Kanai et al, 2006) and reproduction (Verde et al, 2019). However, these previous studies measured time perception at the short-range interval, while the here-reported experiments used intervals between 7 and 16 s. Theories have long argued interval timing between 0 and 3 s differs from longer-range estimates (Münsterberg, 1889;Penney & Vaitilingam, 2008;Poppel, 2004), resulting in functional (Grondin, 2010) and neural dissociations (Wittmann, 2014).…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 99%
“…Although the illusion of perceived motion partially depends on oculomotor events such as microsaccades [ 21 , 22 ], Au et al found that the temporal dilation effect cannot be attributed to the motion of the object in retinotopic terms but rather spatiotopic terms [ 74 ]. Furthermore, within a virtual reality environment, Lo Verde et al conducted a study that showed a time-dilation effect for apparent motion but not for retinal or world motion alone [ 80 ]. These findings challenge the notion that temporal expansion depends on retinal motion generated by ocular movements.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In principle the same is true of time, although this has been studied much less in VR. By altering velocities of objects and selflocation VR can be used to induce distortions in time perception, for example (Volante et al, 2018;Verde et al, 2019). VR can also be used to influence time in another way by inducing the illusion of traveling back through time (Friedman et al, 2014;Pizarro et al, 2015).…”
Section: Space and Time In Virtual Realitymentioning
confidence: 99%