Four ways we perceive motion
1) real motion
2) illusory motion
3) induced motion
4) motion after effects
illusory motion
where you have stationary stimuli that are displaced in time that the visual system interprets as motion
– no motion present, but it is perceived.
– Apparent movement - stationary stimuli are presented in slightly different locations
– Basis of movement in movies and TV
induced motion
some other object is moving but you’re misplacing it (sitting at a stop in a car and a car next to you moves and you feel like your car is moving)
real motion
an object is physically moving
Motion after-effect
THIS IS NOT ILLUSORY MOTION
after an observer has perceived some sort of movement for some period of time (and that perceived motion could have been illusory) and looking at a stationary object the movement seems to go in the opposite direction
Observer looks at movement of object for 30 to 60 seconds.
– Then observer looks at a stationary object.
– Movement appears to occur in the opposite direction from the original movement.
– The waterfall illusion seen in lab 3 is an example of this.
different at the brain level of real vs. apparent motion
Axel Larson experiment
– Participant is scanned by an fMRI while viewing three displays:
Results:
– Apparent and real motion: activation of visual cortex (V1) from both sets of stimuli was similar.
- the experience is just about the same: something is causing that activity
Reichardt detectors
are neurons that fire to real movement in a
specific direction.
one neuron has a receptive field looking for motion in a particular direction
This is done through one-way lateral inhibition.
– receptor A causes inhibition in its neighbor as light move to the right [inhibits F as the light is arriving at B].
– receptor C will inhibit activity from D, but only after the light has passed. As the
light moves leftward, the neuron (I) continues firing - - - get’s to a new excitatory field before inhibition can take place
How can a neuron have a
receptive field that detects motion?
Reichardt detectors
Complex cortical cells…
……respond preferentially to an oriented bar moving in a specific direction.
– This can be accomplished with Reichardt detectors and/or convergence of simple cortical cells.
– However, each cell has a small receptive field. It can’t “see” what a large object is doing.
– So, the cell can only detect local activity as a stimulus (e.g. bar) moves across the receptive field on the retina.
each receptive field by itself can’t see…
…. the larger object
can only detect the local activity (one little bar of light)
Aperture problem
you have a large stimulus leading across a tiny receptive field
– Activity of a single complex cell does not provide accurate information about direction of movement.
solution to aperture problem
lots of little apertures that converge their inputs in the dorsal pathway (where/how pathway) to higher regions: more hierarchical organization
outputs from V1 converge on area MT that goes to area MST
dorsal pathway
where/how pathway spatial reasoning = movement
solution to aperture problem again
Responses of a number of V1 neurons are pooled via hierarchical convergence in ‘higher’ areas.
Firing and coherence experiment by Newsome et al. (1989)
– Monkeys were taught to judge direction of dot movement while measurements were taken from MT neurons.
– Results showed that as coherence of dot movement increased, so did the firing of the MT neurons and the judgment of movement accuracy.
Microstimulation experiment by Movshon and
Newsome (1992)
what was causally happening? was MT just responding to the input or did it have a more causal
follow up experiment
– Demonstrated how neural activation can play a causal role in altering perception.
– Monkey trained to indicate direction of fields of moving dots.
– Neurons in MT cortex that respond to specific direction were activated (electrically stimulated).
– Experimenter used microstimulation to activate different direction sensitive neurons.
– Monkey shifted judgment to the artificially
stimulated direction.