Stimulus configuration determines the detectability of motion signals in noise.

We measured the detectability of moving signal dots in dynamic noise to determine whether local motion signals are preferentially combined along an axis parallel to the direction of motion. Observers were asked to detect a signal composed of three dots moving in a linear trajectory among dynamic noise dots. The signal dots were collinear and equally spaced in a configuration that was either parallel to or perpendicular to their trajectory. The probability of detecting the signal was measured as a function of noise density, over a range of signal dot spacings from 0.5 degrees to 5.0 degrees. At any given noise density, the signal in the parallel configuration was more detectable than that in the perpendicular configuration. Our four observers could tolerate 1.5-2.5 times more noise in the parallel configuration. This improvement is not due merely to temporal summation between consecutive dots in the parallel trajectory. Temporal summation functions measured on our observers indicate that the benefit from spatial coincidence of the dots lasts for no more than 50 ms, whereas the increased detectability of the parallel configuration is observed up to the largest temporal separations tested (210 ms). These results demonstrate that dots arranged parallel to the signal trajectory are more easily detected than those arranged perpendicularly. Moreover, this enhancement points to the existence of visual mechanisms that preferentially organize motion information parallel to the direction of motion.

[1]  U. Polat,et al.  The architecture of perceptual spatial interactions , 1994, Vision Research.

[2]  Michael J. Berry,et al.  Anticipation of moving stimuli by the retina , 1999, Nature.

[3]  S. McKee,et al.  Detecting a trajectory embedded in random-direction motion noise , 1995, Vision Research.

[4]  V. Ramachandran,et al.  Visual inertia in apparent motion , 1987, Vision Research.

[5]  J Nachmias,et al.  Letter: Grating contrast: discrimination may be better than detection. , 1974, Vision research.

[6]  J J Koenderink,et al.  Effects of element orientation on apparent motion perception , 1990, Perception & psychophysics.

[7]  O. Braddick,et al.  The combination of motion signals over time , 1989, Vision Research.

[8]  D. M. Green,et al.  Signal detection theory and psychophysics , 1966 .

[9]  J. P. Jones,et al.  An evaluation of the two-dimensional Gabor filter model of simple receptive fields in cat striate cortex. , 1987, Journal of neurophysiology.

[10]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Temporal and spatial characteristics of the upper displacement limit for motion in random dots , 1984, Vision Research.

[11]  U. Polat,et al.  Lateral interactions between spatial channels: Suppression and facilitation revealed by lateral masking experiments , 1993, Vision Research.

[12]  Romi Nijhawan,et al.  Motion extrapolation in catching , 1994, Nature.

[13]  Alan L. Yuille,et al.  Probabilistic Motion Estimation Based on Temporal Coherence , 2000, Neural Computation.

[14]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Sensitivity to Shearing and Compressive Motion in Random Dots , 1985, Perception.

[15]  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.

[16]  S. McKee,et al.  Temporal coherence theory for the detection and measurement of visual motion , 1995, Vision Research.

[17]  D. Burr,et al.  Two-dimensional spatial and spatial-frequency selectivity of motion-sensitive mechanisms in human vision. , 1991, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[18]  Preeti Verghese,et al.  The psychophysics of visual search , 2000, Vision Research.

[19]  J. M. Foley,et al.  Contrast masking in human vision. , 1980, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[20]  B. Dosher,et al.  External noise distinguishes attention mechanisms , 1998, Vision Research.

[21]  Wilson S. Geisler,et al.  Motion streaks provide a spatial code for motion direction , 1999, Nature.

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

[23]  David J. Field,et al.  Contour integration by the human visual system: Evidence for a local “association field” , 1993, Vision Research.

[24]  J. Koenderink,et al.  Spatiotemporal integration in the detection of coherent motion , 1984, Vision Research.

[25]  I Kovács,et al.  A closed curve is much more than an incomplete one: effect of closure in figure-ground segmentation. , 1993, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[26]  D. Burr,et al.  Two stages of visual processing for radial and circular motion , 1995, Nature.

[27]  D. Burr,et al.  Spatial summation properties of directionally selective mechanisms in human vision. , 1991, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[28]  S. McKee,et al.  Sequential recruitment in the discrimination of velocity. , 1985, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[29]  P. Verghese,et al.  Combining speed information across space , 1995, Vision Research.

[30]  V. S. RAMACHANDKAN,et al.  EXTRAPOLATION OF MOTION PATH IN HUMAN VISUAL PERCEPTION , 2002 .

[31]  Frans A. J. Verstraten,et al.  Spatial summation and its interaction with the temporal integration mechanism in human motion perception , 1994, Vision Research.