Feature matching and segmentation in motion perception

We examined the role of feature matching in motion perception. The stimulus sequence was constructed from a vertical, 1 cycle deg–1 sinusoidal grating divided into horizontal strips of equal height, where alternate strips moved leftward and rightward. The initial relative phase of adjacent strips was either 0° (aligned) or 90° (non–aligned) and the motion was sampled at 90° phase steps. A blank interstimulus interval (ISI) of 0 to 117 ms was introduced between each 33 ms presentation of the stimulus frames. The observers had to identify the direction of motion of the central strip. Motion was perceived correctly at short ISIs, but at longer ISIs performance was much better for the non–aligned sequence than the aligned sequence. This difference in performance may reflect a role for feature correspondence and grouping of features in motion perception at longer ISIs. In the aligned sequence half the frames consisted of a single coherent vertical grating, while the interleaved frames contained short strips. We argue that to achieve feature matching over time, the long edge and bar features must be broken up perceptually (segmented) into shorter elements before these short segments can appear to move in opposite directions. This idea correctly predicted that overlaying narrow, stationary, black horizontal lines at the junctions of the grating strips would improve performance in the aligned condition. The results support the view that, in addition to motion energy, feature analysis and feature tracking play an important role in motion perception.

[1]  P. Cavanagh,et al.  Cortical fMRI activation produced by attentive tracking of moving targets. , 1998, Journal of neurophysiology.

[2]  T. Carney Evidence for an early motion system which integrates information from the two eyes , 1997, Vision Research.

[3]  D Sullivan,et al.  Strength of Motion Aftereffect Varies with Segregation of Test Field and Surround , 1996 .

[4]  Brian J. Rogers,et al.  Motion detection is limited by element density not spatial frequency , 1996, Vision Research.

[5]  G. Sperling,et al.  The functional architecture of human visual motion perception , 1995, Vision Research.

[6]  J. T. Petersik A comparison of varieties of “second-order” motion , 1995, Vision Research.

[7]  A. T. Smith,et al.  Correspondence-based and energy-based detection of second-order motion in human vision. , 1994, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[8]  Curtis L. Baker,et al.  Dependence on stimulus onset asynchrony in apparent motion: Evidence for two mechanisms , 1993, Vision Research.

[9]  P Cavanagh,et al.  Attention-based motion perception. , 1992, Science.

[10]  M. J. Morgan,et al.  Spatial filtering precedes motion detection , 1992, Nature.

[11]  P. Cavanagh,et al.  ISI produces reverse apparent motion , 1990, Vision Research.

[12]  Mark A. Georgeson,et al.  The temporal range of motion sensing and motion perception , 1990, Vision Research.

[13]  Mark A. Georgeson,et al.  Monocular motion sensing, binocular motion perception , 1989, Vision Research.

[14]  Petersik Jt The two-process distinction in apparent motion. , 1989 .

[15]  G Sperling,et al.  Two motion perception mechanisms revealed through distance-driven reversal of apparent motion. , 1989, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[16]  Mark A. Georgeson,et al.  Temporal properties of spatial contrast vision , 1987, Vision Research.

[17]  Curtis L. Baker,et al.  Eccentricity-dependent scaling of the limits for short-range apparent motion perception , 1985, Vision Research.

[18]  A J Ahumada,et al.  Model of human visual-motion sensing. , 1985, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[19]  E H Adelson,et al.  Spatiotemporal energy models for the perception of motion. , 1985, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[20]  S. Ullman,et al.  The Interpretation of Visual Motion , 1981 .

[21]  S. Ullman The Effect of Similarity between Line Segments on the Correspondence Strength in Apparent Motion , 1980, Perception.

[22]  O J Braddick,et al.  Low-level and high-level processes in apparent motion. , 1980, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[23]  S. Anstis The perception of apparent movement. , 1980, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[24]  A. Watson,et al.  Patterns of temporal interaction in the detection of gratings , 1977, Vision Research.

[25]  J. Lappin,et al.  The detection of coherence in moving random-dot patterns , 1976, Vision Research.

[26]  A. Pantle,et al.  A multistable movement display: evidence for two separate motion systems in human vision. , 1976, Science.

[27]  O. Braddick A short-range process in apparent motion. , 1974, Vision research.

[28]  Takeo Watanabe,et al.  Roles of attention and form in visual motion processing : Psychophysical and brain imaging studies , 2000 .

[29]  George Sperling,et al.  A Systems Analysis of Visual Motion Perception , 1999 .

[30]  Takeo Watanabe,et al.  The role of parsing in high level motion processing , 1998 .

[31]  P Cavanagh,et al.  Short-range vs long-range motion: not a valid distinction. , 1991, Spatial vision.

[32]  Petersik Jt,et al.  Comments on Cavanagh and Mather (1989): Coming up short (and long) , 1991 .

[33]  P. Cavanagh,et al.  Motion: the long and short of it. , 1989, Spatial vision.

[34]  B Julesz,et al.  Cooperative and non-cooperative processes of apparent movement of random-dot cinematograms. , 1985, Spatial vision.

[35]  Oliver Braddick,et al.  Apparent motion and the motion detector , 1978 .

[36]  B. Julesz Foundations of Cyclopean Perception , 1971 .