Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-xtgtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T23:19:15.459Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The interaction between orientation and motion signals in moving oriented Glass patterns

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 July 2017

ANDREA PAVAN ,
LUCY M. BIMSON ,
MARTIN G. GALL ,
FILIPPO GHIN  and
GEORGE MATHER
ANDREA PAVAN*
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, University of Lincoln, Lincoln LN5 7AY, UK
LUCY M. BIMSON
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, University of Lincoln, Lincoln LN5 7AY, UK
MARTIN G. GALL
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, University of Lincoln, Lincoln LN5 7AY, UK
FILIPPO GHIN
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, University of Lincoln, Lincoln LN5 7AY, UK
GEORGE MATHER
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, University of Lincoln, Lincoln LN5 7AY, UK
*
*Address correspondence to: Andrea Pavan, University of Lincoln, Brayford Pool, Lincoln, Lincolnshire LN6 7TS, UK. E-mail: apavan@lincoln.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Previous psychophysical evidence suggests that motion and orientation processing systems interact asymmetrically in the human visual system, with orientation information having a stronger influence on the perceived motion direction than vice versa. To investigate the mechanisms underlying this motion-form interaction we used moving and oriented Glass patterns (GPs), which consist of randomly distributed dot pairs (dipoles) that induce the percept of an oriented texture. In Experiment 1 we varied the angle between dipole orientation and motion direction (conflict angle). In separate sessions participants either judged the orientation or motion direction of the GP. In addition, the spatiotemporal characteristics of dipole motion were manipulated as a way to limit (Experiment 1) or favor (Experiment 2) the availability of orientation signals from motion (motion streaks). The results of Experiment 1 showed that apparent GP motion direction is attracted toward dipole orientation, and apparent GP orientation is repulsed from GP motion. The results of Experiment 2 showed stronger repulsion effects when judging the GP orientation, but stronger motion streaks from the GP motion can dominate over the signals provided by conflicting dipole orientation. These results are consistent with the proposal that two separate mechanisms contribute to our perception of stimuli which contain conflicting orientation and motion information: (i) perceived GP motion is mediated by spatial motion-direction sensors, in which signals from motion sensors are combined with excitatory input from orientation-tuned sensors tuned to orientations parallel to the axis of GP motion, (ii) perceived GP orientation is mediated by orientation-tuned sensors which mutually inhibit each other. The two mechanisms are revealed by the different effects of conflict angle and dipole lifetime on perceived orientation and motion direction.

Keywords

Moving Glass patternsOriented Glass patternsMotion-form interactionSpatial motion-direction sensorMotion streaks
Type
Research Article
Information
Visual Neuroscience , Volume 34 , 2017 , E010
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Albright, T.D. (1984). Direction and orientation selectivity of neurons in visual area MT of the macaque. Journal of Neurophysiology 52, 1106.Google Scholar
Apthorp, D. & Alais, D. (2009). Tilt aftereffects and tilt illusions induced by fast translational motion: Evidence for motion streaks. Journal of Vision 9, 1–11.Google Scholar
Apthorp, D., Cass, J. & Alais, D. (2011). The spatial tuning of “motion streak” mechanisms revealed by masking and adaptation. Journal of Vision 11, 17.Google Scholar
Apthorp, D., Schwarzkopf, D.S., Kaul, C., Bahrami, B., Alais, D. & Rees, G. (2013). Direct evidence for encoding of motion streaks in human visual cortex. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 280, 20122339.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Benjamini, Y. & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B 57, 289–300.Google Scholar
Benjamini, Y. & Yekutieli, D. (2001). The control of the false discovery rate in multiple testing under dependency. Annals of Statistics 29, 1165–1188.Google Scholar
Benjamini, Y. & Yekutieli, D. (2005). False discovery rate-adjusted multiple confidence intervals for selected parameters. Journal of the American Statistical Association 100, 71–81.Google Scholar
Benson, D. & Greenberg, J.P. (1969). Visual form agnosia: A specific defect in visual discrimination. Archives of Neurology 20, 82–89.Google Scholar
Benton, C.P. & Curran, W. (2003). Direction repulsion goes global. Current Biology 13, 767–771.Google Scholar
Braddick, O.J., O’Brien, J.M.D., Wattam-Bell, J., Atkinson, J. & Turner, R. (2000). Form and motion coherence activate independent, but not dorsal/ventral segregated, networks in the human brain. Current Biology 10, 731–734.Google Scholar
Brainard, D.H. (1997). The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision 10, 433–436.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bullier, J., Hupe, J.M., James, A.C. & Girard, P. (2001). The role of feedback connections in shaping the responses of visual cortical neurons. Progress in Brain Research 134, 193–204.Google Scholar
Burke, D. & Wenderoth, P. (1993). Determinants of two-dimensional motion aftereffects induced by simultaneously- and alternately-presented plaid components. Vision Research 33, 351–359.Google Scholar
Burr, D. (1980). Motion smear. Nature 284, 164–165.Google Scholar
Burr, D.C. & Ross, J. (2002). Direct evidence that “speedlines” influence motion mechanisms. Journal of Neuroscience 22, 8661–8664.Google Scholar
Calabretta, R. & Parisi, D. (2005). Evolutionary connectionism and mind/brain modularity. In Modularity: Understanding the Development and Evolution of Natural Complex Systems, ed. Callebaut, W., & Rasskin-Gutman, D., pp. 309–330. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chen, Y., Meng, X., Matthews, N. & Qian, N. (2005). Effects of attention on motion repulsion. Vision Research 45, 1329–1339.Google Scholar
Dakin, S.C. & Bex, P.J. (2001). Local and global visual grouping: Tuning for spatial frequency and contrast. Journal of Vision 1, 99–111.Google Scholar
Van Essen, D.C. & Gallant, J.L. (1994). Neural mechanisms of form and motion processing in the primate visual system. Neuron 13, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Geisler, W.S. (1999). Motion streaks provide a spatial code for motion direction. Nature 400, 65–69.Google Scholar
Glass, L. (1969). Moiré effect from random dots. Nature 223, 578–580.Google Scholar
Hiris, E. & Blake, R. (1996). Direction repulsion in motion transparency. Visual Neuroscience 13, 187–197.Google Scholar
Kim, J. & Wilson, H. (1996). Direction repulsion between components in motion transparency. Vision Research 36, 1177–1187.Google Scholar
Kourtzi, Z., Krekelberg, B. & van Wezel, R.J.A. (2008). Linking form and motion in the primate brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 12, 230–236.Google Scholar
Krekelberg, B., Dannenberg, S., Hoffmann, K-P., Bremmer, F. & Ross, J. (2003). Neural correlates of implied motion. Nature 424, 674–677.Google Scholar
Krekelberg, B., Vatakis, A. & Kourtzi, Z. (2005). Implied motion from form in the human visual cortex. Journal of Neurophysiology 94, 4373–4386.Google Scholar
Lamme, V.A.F., Supèr, H. & Spekreijse, H. (1998). Feedforward, horizontal, and feedback processing in the visual cortex. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 8, 529–535.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Laycock, R., Crewther, D.P., Fitzgerald, P.B. & Crewther, S.G. (2007). Evidence for fast signals and later processing in human V1/V2 and V5/MT+: A TMS study of motion perception. Journal of Neurophysiology 98, 1253–1262.Google Scholar
Lennie, P. (1998). Single units and visual cortical organization. Perception 27, 889–935.Google Scholar
Mannion, D.J., McDonald, J.S. & Clifford, C.W.G. (2009). Discrimination of the local orientation structure of spiral Glass patterns early in human visual cortex. NeuroImage 46, 511–515.Google Scholar
Mannion, D.J., McDonald, J.S. & Clifford, C.W.G. (2010). The influence of global form on local orientation anisotropies in human visual cortex. NeuroImage 52, 600–605.Google Scholar
Marshak, W. & Sekuler, R. (1979). Mutual repulsion between moving visual targets. Science 205, 1399–1401.Google Scholar
Mather, G. & Moulden, B. (1980). A simultaneous shift in apparent direction: Further evidence for a “distribution-shift” model of direction coding. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 32, 325–333.Google Scholar
Mather, G., Pavan, A., Bellacosa, R.M. & Casco, C. (2012). Psychophysical evidence for interactions between visual motion and form processing at the level of motion integrating receptive fields. Neuropsychologia 50, 153–159.Google Scholar
Mather, G., Pavan, A., Bellacosa Marotti, R., Campana, G. & Casco, C. (2013). Interactions between motion and form processing in the human visual system. Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience 7, 65.Google Scholar
Ohla, K., Busch, N.A., Dahlem, M.A. & Herrmann, C.S. (2005). Circles are different: The perception of Glass patterns modulates early event-related potentials. Vision Research 45, 2668–2676.Google Scholar
Or, C.C.F., Khuu, S.K. & Hayes, A. (2010). Moving Glass patterns: Asymmetric interaction between motion and form. Perception 39, 447–463.Google Scholar
Ostwald, D., Lam, J.M., Li, S. & Kourtzi, Z. (2008). Neural coding of global form in the human visual cortex. Journal of Neurophysiology 99, 2456–2469.Google Scholar
Pavan, A., Casco, C., Mather, G., Bellacosa, R.M., Cuturi, L.F. & Campana, G. (2011). The effect of spatial orientation on detecting motion trajectories in noise. Vision Research 51, 2077–2084.Google Scholar
Pavan, A., Hocketstaller, J., Contillo, A. & Greenlee, M.W. (2016). Tilt aftereffect following adaptation to translational Glass patterns. Scientific Reports 6, 23567.Google Scholar
Pavan, A., Marotti, R.B. & Mather, G. (2013). Motion-form interactions beyond the motion integration level: Evidence for interactions between orientation and optic flow signals. Journal of Vision 13, 16.Google Scholar
Pelli, D.G. (1997). The Video Toolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision 10, 437–442.Google Scholar
Qian, N. & Geesaman, B.J. (1995). Motion repulsion depends on the distance between the moving elements. Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science 36(Supplement), 50.Google Scholar
Rauber, H.J. & Treue, S. (1998). Reference repulsion when judging the direction of visual motion. Perception 27, 393–402.Google Scholar
Ross, J. (2004). The perceived direction and speed of global motion in Glass pattern sequences. Vision Research 44, 441–448.Google Scholar
Ross, J., Badcock, D.R. & Hayes, A. (2000). Coherent global motion in the absence of coherent velocity signals. Current Biology 10, 679–682.Google Scholar
Sillito, A.M., Cudeiro, J. & Jones, H.E. (2006). Always returning: Feedback and sensory processing in visual cortex and thalamus. Trends in Neurosciences 29, 307–316.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ungerleider, L.G. & Mishkin, M. (1982). Two cortical visual systems. In Analysis of Visual Behavior, ed. Ingle, D.J., Goodale, M.A., & Mansfield, R.J.W., pp. 549–586. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, H.R. & Wilkinson, F. (1998). Detection of global structure in Glass patterns: Implications for form vision. Vision Research 38, 2933–2947.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wishart, K., Braddick, O. & Curran, W. (1998). Direction repulsion in transparent and segregated motions. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science 39, 1076.Google Scholar
World Medical Association (2013). World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA 310, 2191–2194.Google Scholar
Zihl, J., Von Cramon, D. & Mai, N. (1983). Selective disturbance of movement vision after bilateral brain damage. Brain 106, 313–340.Google Scholar
Zihl, J., Von Cramon, D., Mai, N. & Schmid, C.H. (1991). Disturbance of movement vision after bilateral posterior brain damage: Further evidence and follow up observations. Brain 114, 2235–2252.Google Scholar