Apparent Motion Can Impair and Enhance Target Visibility: The Role of Shape in Predicting and Postdicting Object Continuity

Some previous studies have reported that the visibility of a target in the path of an apparent motion sequence is impaired; other studies have reported that it is facilitated. Here we test whether the relation of shape similarity between the inducing and target stimuli has an influence on visibility. Reasoning from a theoretical framework in which there are both predictive and postdictive influences on shape perception, we report experiments involving three-frame apparent motion sequences. In these experiments, we systematically varied the congruence between target shapes and contextual shapes (preceding and following). Experiment 1 established the baseline visibility of the target, when it was presented in isolation and when it was preceded or followed by a single contextual shape. This set the stage for Experiment 2, where the shape congruence between the target and both contextual shapes was varied orthogonally. The results showed a remarkable degree of synergy between predictive and postdictive influences, allowing a backward-masked shape that was almost invisible when presented in isolation to be discriminated with a d′ of 2 when either of the contextual shapes are congruent. In Experiment 3 participants performed a shape-feature detection task with the same stimuli, with the results indicating that the predictive and postdictive effects were now absent. This finding confirms that shape congruence effects on visibility are specific to shape perception and are not due to either general alerting effects for objects in the path of a motion signal nor to low-level perceptual filling-in.

[1]  T. Bachmann The process of perceptual retouch: Nonspecific afferent activation dynamics in explaining visual masking , 1984, Perception & psychophysics.

[2]  J. Enns Visual binding in the standing wave illusion , 2002, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[3]  Thomas U. Otto,et al.  The flight path of the phoenix--the visible trace of invisible elements in human vision. , 2006, Journal of vision.

[4]  T. Mima,et al.  Involvement of V5/MT+ in object substitution masking: evidence from repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation , 2005, Neuroreport.

[5]  D. J. Felleman,et al.  Distributed hierarchical processing in the primate cerebral cortex. , 1991, Cerebral cortex.

[6]  James T. Enns,et al.  Object substitution masking , 2008, Scholarpedia.

[7]  E. Marg A VISION OF THE BRAIN , 1994 .

[8]  J. Enns,et al.  Space and Time in Perception and Action: Object updating: a force for perceptual continuity and scene stability in human vision , 2010 .

[9]  P A Kolers,et al.  Figural change in apparent motion. , 1971, Journal of experimental psychology.

[10]  A. Wilson,et al.  Transposition in backward masking the case of the travelling gap , 1985, Vision Research.

[11]  Neil A. Macmillan,et al.  Detection Theory: A User's Guide , 1991 .

[12]  Alejandro Lleras,et al.  On the role of object representations in substitution masking. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[13]  Caspar M. Schwiedrzik,et al.  A spatio-temporal interaction on the apparent motion trace , 2007, Vision Research.

[14]  Wataru Teramoto,et al.  Sound can enhance the suppression of visual target detection in apparent motion trajectory , 2012, Vision Research.

[15]  Geraint Rees,et al.  Primary visual cortex activation on the path of apparent motion is mediated by feedback from hMT+/V5 , 2006, NeuroImage.

[16]  Ronald A. Rensink,et al.  Competition for consciousness among visual events: the psychophysics of reentrant visual processes. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[17]  Taosheng Liu,et al.  Human MT+ mediates perceptual filling-in during apparent motion , 2004, NeuroImage.

[18]  G G Haydu,et al.  Perception of Apparent Motion. , 1960, Science.

[19]  Jiro Gyoba,et al.  Inhibition of target detection in apparent motion trajectory. , 2011, Journal of vision.

[20]  Johannes J. Fahrenfort,et al.  Masking Disrupts Reentrant Processing in Human Visual Cortex , 2007, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[21]  C. Moore,et al.  When the target becomes the mask: using apparent motion to isolate the object-level component of object substitution masking. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[22]  Michael Pilling,et al.  What is being masked in object substitution masking? , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[23]  P. A. Kolers,et al.  Shape and color in apparent motion , 1976, Vision Research.

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

[25]  Hinze Hogendoorn,et al.  Interpolation and extrapolation on the path of apparent motion , 2008, Vision Research.

[26]  J. Enns,et al.  What’s new in visual masking? , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[27]  Diane M. Beck,et al.  Rescuing stimuli from invisibility: Inducing a momentary release from visual masking with pre-target entrainment , 2010, Cognition.

[28]  Sieu K. Khuu,et al.  Apparent motion distorts the shape of a stimulus briefly presented along the motion path. , 2010, Journal of vision.

[29]  Steven Yantis,et al.  Visual interactions in the path of apparent motion , 1998, Nature Neuroscience.

[30]  A. Gellatly,et al.  Target Visibility in the Standing Wave Illusion: Is Mask—Target Shape Similarity Important? , 2009, Perception.

[31]  J. Enns,et al.  Object Substitution: A New Form of Masking in Unattended Visual Locations , 1997 .

[32]  G. Henry,et al.  Physiological studies on the feedback connection to the striate cortex from cortical areas 18 and 19 of the cat , 1988, Experimental Brain Research.

[33]  Hidenao Fukuyama,et al.  Recovery from object substitution masking induced by transient suppression of visual motion processing: a repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation study. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[34]  B. Breitmeyer,et al.  Recent models and findings in visual backward masking: A comparison, review, and update , 2000, Perception & psychophysics.

[35]  Tony Ro,et al.  Feedback Contributions to Visual Awareness in Human Occipital Cortex , 2003, Current Biology.

[36]  P. A. Kolers SOME DIFFERENCES BETWEEN REAL AND APPARENT VISUAL MOVEMENT. , 1963, Vision research.

[37]  Markus Lappe,et al.  A model of the perceived relative positions of moving objects based upon a slow averaging process , 2000, Vision Research.

[38]  James T. Enns,et al.  The path of least persistence: Object status mediates visual updating , 2007, Vision Research.

[39]  J. Enns,et al.  What's next? New evidence for prediction in human vision , 2008, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[40]  A. Johnston,et al.  Masking and color inheritance along the apparent motion path. , 2012, Journal of vision.

[41]  Lars Muckli,et al.  Primary Visual Cortex Activity along the Apparent-Motion Trace Reflects Illusory Perception , 2005, PLoS biology.

[42]  T J Sejnowski,et al.  Motion integration and postdiction in visual awareness. , 2000, Science.