Contribution of Visuospatial and Motion-Tracking to Invisible Motion.

Luca Battaglini, Clara Casco
Author Information
  1. Luca Battaglini: Department of General Psychology, Perception, and Psychophysics, University of Padova Padova, Italy.
  2. Clara Casco: Department of General Psychology, Perception, and Psychophysics, University of Padova Padova, Italy.

Abstract

People experience an object's motion even when it is occluded. We investigate the processing of invisible motion in three experiments. Observers saw a moving circle passing behind an invisible, irregular hendecagonal polygon and had to respond as quickly as possible when the target had "just reappeared" from behind the occluder. Without explicit cues allowing the end of each of the eight hidden trajectories to be predicted (length ranging between 4.7 and 5 deg), we found as expected, if visuospatial attention was involved, anticipation errors, providing that information on pre-occluder motion was available. This indicates that the observers, rather than simply responding when they saw the target, tended to anticipate its reappearance (Experiment 1). The new finding is that, with a fixation mark indicating the center of the invisible trajectory, a linear relationship between the physical and judged occlusion duration is found, but not without it (Experiment 2) or with a fixation mark varying in position from trial to trial (Experiment 3). We interpret the role of central fixation in the differences in distinguishing trajectories smaller than 0.3 deg, by suggesting that it reflects spatiotemporal computation and motion-tracking. These two mechanisms allow visual imagery to form of the point symmetrical to that of the disappearance, with respect to fixation, and then for the occluded moving target to be tracked up to this point.

Keywords

References

  1. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1998 Jun;24(3):901-14 [PMID: 9627424]
  2. Psychon Bull Rev. 1999 Jun;6(2):204-23 [PMID: 12199208]
  3. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2015 Feb;77(2):603-12 [PMID: 25388368]
  4. Nature. 1991 Apr 25;350(6320):699-702 [PMID: 2023631]
  5. Vision Res. 2000;40(26):3651-64 [PMID: 11116167]
  6. Percept Psychophys. 1995 Feb;57(2):231-45 [PMID: 7885822]
  7. Spat Vis. 1997;10(4):433-6 [PMID: 9176952]
  8. Psychon Bull Rev. 2006 Jun;13(3):516-23 [PMID: 17048740]
  9. Vision Res. 2008 Mar;48(7):872-81 [PMID: 18279906]
  10. Trends Cogn Sci. 2008 Sep;12(9):334-41 [PMID: 18684661]
  11. Science. 1992 Sep 11;257(5076):1563-5 [PMID: 1523411]
  12. Cogn Psychol. 1995 Feb;28(1):1-16 [PMID: 7895467]
  13. Neuron. 1999 Apr;22(4):751-61 [PMID: 10230795]
  14. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2011 Jul;64(7):1327-43 [PMID: 21480079]
  15. Brain Res. 2007 Mar 2;1135(1):154-66 [PMID: 17198687]
  16. Vision Res. 2011 Jul 1;51(13):1431-56 [PMID: 21324335]
  17. Trends Cogn Sci. 2000 Feb;4(2):42-50 [PMID: 10652521]
  18. Vision Res. 2006 Aug;46(16):2593-601 [PMID: 16545854]
  19. Iperception. 2013 May 22;4(3):180-91 [PMID: 23799195]
  20. Vision Res. 2002 Nov;42(26):2811-6 [PMID: 12450506]
  21. Acta Psychol (Amst). 1995 Sep;89(3):239-60 [PMID: 7572268]
  22. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2010 Feb;72(2):378-86 [PMID: 20139453]
  23. Vision Res. 1995 Oct;35(19):2697-722 [PMID: 7483311]
  24. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2006 Mar;7(3):220-31 [PMID: 16495943]
  25. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2012 Jul;74(5):1056-72 [PMID: 22391892]
  26. Vision Res. 2009 Jun;49(10):1129-43 [PMID: 19038281]
  27. Vision Res. 2009 Aug;49(17):2164-75 [PMID: 19527745]
  28. Vision Res. 2008 Aug;48(18):1884-93 [PMID: 18588909]
  29. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2004 Jun;30(3):431-44 [PMID: 15161377]
  30. J Gen Psychol. 1992 Apr;119(2):105-11 [PMID: 1506842]
  31. Nat Neurosci. 2003 Jan;6(1):66-74 [PMID: 12483216]
  32. Spat Vis. 1997;10(4):437-42 [PMID: 9176953]
  33. J Neurosci. 2005 Sep 7;25(36):8259-66 [PMID: 16148233]
  34. Can J Exp Psychol. 2000 Mar;54(1):1-14 [PMID: 10721235]
  35. Neuropsychologia. 2012 Jan;50(1):153-9 [PMID: 22120007]
  36. Trends Cogn Sci. 1998 Nov 1;2(11):422-4 [PMID: 21227268]
  37. J Vis. 2008 Aug 01;8(10):2.1-11 [PMID: 19146344]
  38. Perception. 1984;13(4):429-41 [PMID: 6527930]
  39. Psychol Res. 1992;54(3):175-81 [PMID: 1509025]
  40. PLoS One. 2011;6(10):e26154 [PMID: 22022546]
  41. J Vis. 2014 Nov 14;14(13):10 [PMID: 25398972]
  42. Exp Brain Res. 2006 Jan;168(3):313-21 [PMID: 16180042]
  43. Trends Cogn Sci. 1999 Aug;3(8):301-310 [PMID: 10431184]
  44. Vision Res. 2000;40(10-12):1365-76 [PMID: 10788646]
  45. Neuron. 2007 Jul 19;55(2):301-12 [PMID: 17640530]
  46. Exp Brain Res. 1997 Oct;116(3):445-55 [PMID: 9372293]
  47. J Vis. 2011 Dec 12;11(14):null [PMID: 22159826]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0motioninvisiblefixationtargetExperimentoccludedsawmovingbehindtrajectoriesdegfoundvisuospatialattentionmarktrial3motion-trackingpointPeopleexperienceobject'seveninvestigateprocessingthreeexperimentsObserverscirclepassingirregularhendecagonalpolygonrespondquicklypossible"justreappeared"occluderWithoutexplicitcuesallowingendeighthiddenpredictedlengthranging475expectedinvolvedanticipationerrorsprovidinginformationpre-occluderavailableindicatesobserversrathersimplyrespondingtendedanticipatereappearance1newfindingindicatingcentertrajectorylinearrelationshipphysicaljudgedocclusiondurationwithout2varyingpositioninterpretrolecentraldifferencesdistinguishingsmaller0suggestingreflectsspatiotemporalcomputationtwomechanismsallowvisualimageryformsymmetricaldisappearancerespecttrackedContributionVisuospatialMotion-TrackingInvisibleMotionextrapolationspatialcue

Similar Articles

Cited By