PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 929181

A phantom-motion aftereffect.

N Weisstein·W Maguire·K Berbaum
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Motion aftereffects, typically found to result only from localized retinal stimulation, were obtained within regions of the visual field that had not been stimulated by moving contours. "Phantom" stripes are seen moving through a physically homogeneous (empty) region of the visual field when vertical stripes move above and below that region. Immediately afterward, stationary stripes in the previously empty region appear to move in the opposite direction. This phantom-motion aftereffect provides a novel instance of the way global structure affects processes that have been assumed to be influenced only by simpler local spatial and temporal variables.

Explore related subjects

AfterimageEye MovementsHumansIllusionsMotion PerceptionOptical IllusionsVisual FieldsJournal ArticleResearch Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

N Weisstein, W Maguire, K Berbaum. 1977-12-02. A phantom-motion aftereffect.. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.929181

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed1992

Visual persistence of figures defined by relative motion.

In order to measure visual persistence of figures that were solely defined by relative motion (motion-defined figures or motion figures), random-dot kinematograms were used to form stimulus figures in the two-frame, missing element task introduced by Di Lollo, V. (1977 Nature, 257, 241-243). Experiment 1 showed that motion-defined figures persisted for about 130 msec after the termination of the stimulus presentation (i.e. after the dots stopped moving). This was similar to but several tens of milliseconds longer than the visual persistence of figures which were defined by a luminance difference (luminance-defined figures or luminance figures) in the same random-dot pattern. Since motion detectors are not found in the retina or lateral geniculate in primates, our results strongly suggest that visual persistence is not only a retinal phenomenon but also a cortical one. Experiment 2 investigated the possible influence of motion aftereffects on the visual persistence of motion figures. The results showed that coherent movement of the dots over the whole display after the stimulus offset did not reduce the visual persistence of motion figures, suggesting that the source of this persistence is not a motion aftereffect. In Experiment 3, visual persistence for the motion-defined figures was shown to be longer than that for luminance-defined figures independently of the contrast of the stimulus figure as long as the stimuli could be seen clearly enough. This suggests that different mechanisms are involved in the visual persistence of motion-defined and luminance-defined figures.

Afterimage↗
PubMed1991

Visual perception--a hypothesis.

Based on the results of after-image experiments, it can be concluded that the retinal perception of image position is linked to head position information, since this affects after-image positioning. Why actual perception of object position is not affected is hypothesised as a resetting of the retinal horizon, from information received on head position. Tilting of the after-image is thus explained as superimposition of the former image on a reset (tilted) horizon (axis).

Afterimage↗