Independent coding of object motion and position revealed by distinct contingent aftereffects

Despite several findings of perceptual asynchronies between object features, it remains unclear whether independent neuronal populations necessarily code these perceptually unbound properties. To examine this, we investigated the binding between an object's spatial frequency and its rotational motion using contingent motion aftereffects (MAE). Subjects adapted to an oscillating grating whose direction of rotation was paired with a high or low spatial frequency pattern. In separate adaptation conditions, we varied the moment when the spatial frequency change occurred relative to the direction reversal. After adapting to one stimulus, subjects made judgments of either the perceived MAE (rotational movement) or the position shift (instantaneous phase rotation) that accompanied the MAE. To null the spatial frequency-contingent MAE, motion reversals had to physically lag changes in spatial frequency during adaptation. To null the position shift that accompanied the MAE, however, no temporal lag between the attributes was required. This demonstrates that perceived motion and position can be perceptually misbound. Indeed, in certain conditions, subjects perceived the test pattern to drift in one direction while its position appeared shifted in the opposite direction. The dissociation between perceived motion and position of the same test pattern, following identical adaptation, demonstrates that distinguishable neural populations code for these object properties.

[1]  A Treisman,et al.  Feature binding, attention and object perception. , 1998, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[2]  Shin'ya Nishida,et al.  Influence of motion signals on the perceived position of spatial pattern , 1999, Nature.

[3]  M C Corballis,et al.  Motion Perception: A Color-Contingent Aftereffect , 1972, Science.

[4]  N. Hepler Color: A Motion-Contingent Aftereffect , 1968, Science.

[5]  J. Mayhew After-effects of movement contingent on direction of gaze. , 1973, Vision Research.

[6]  I. Murakami,et al.  Latency difference, not spatial extrapolation , 1998, Nature Neuroscience.

[7]  A. Baddeley,et al.  Attention : selection, awareness, and control : a tribute to Donald Broadbent , 1996 .

[8]  P. Cavanagh,et al.  Position-based motion perception for color and texture stimuli: effects of contrast and speed , 1999, Vision Research.

[9]  P. Lennie Single Units and Visual Cortical Organization , 1998, Perception.

[10]  S. Zeki,et al.  A direct demonstration of perceptual asynchrony in vision , 1997, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[11]  S. Anstis,et al.  Separate motion aftereffects from each eye and from both eyes , 1983, Vision Research.

[12]  David Whitaker,et al.  Motion Adaptation Distorts Perceived Visual Position , 2002, Current Biology.

[13]  Shinsuke Shimojo,et al.  Gaze modulation of visual aftereffects , 2003, Vision Research.

[14]  Stuart Anstis,et al.  Movement aftereffects contingent on color, intensity, and pattern , 1972 .

[15]  Derek H. Arnold,et al.  A paradox of temporal perception revealed by a stimulus oscillating in colour and orientation , 2003, Vision Research.

[16]  Brian S. Yandell,et al.  Practical Data Analysis for Designed Experiments , 1998 .

[17]  Colin W G Clifford,et al.  Determinants of asynchronous processing in vision , 2002, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[18]  David Whitaker,et al.  Non-veridical size perception of expanding and contracting objects , 1999, Vision Research.

[19]  S Zeki,et al.  The autonomy of the visual systems and the modularity of conscious vision. , 1998, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[20]  Shinsuke Shimojo,et al.  Shifts in perceived position of flashed stimuli by illusory object motion , 2002, Vision Research.

[21]  Harold E Bedell,et al.  Differential latencies and the dynamics of the position computation process for moving targets, assessed with the flash-lag effect , 2004, Vision Research.

[22]  Derek H. Arnold,et al.  Asynchronous processing in vision Color leads motion , 2001, Current Biology.

[23]  Shinsuke Shimojo,et al.  Changing objects lead briefly flashed ones , 2000, Nature Neuroscience.

[24]  DH Hubel,et al.  Psychophysical evidence for separate channels for the perception of form, color, movement, and depth , 1987, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[25]  Saumil S. Patel,et al.  Color and motion: which is the tortoise and which is the hare? , 2003, Vision Research.

[26]  Glyn W Humphreys,et al.  Conscious visual representations built from multiple binding processes: evidence from neuropsychology. , 2003, Progress in brain research.

[27]  S Zeki,et al.  Localization and globalization in conscious vision. , 2001, Annual review of neuroscience.

[28]  P. Cavanagh,et al.  Motion adaptation shifts apparent position without the motion aftereffect , 2003, Perception & psychophysics.

[29]  A. Treisman The binding problem , 1996, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[30]  A. Treisman Visual Attention and the Perception of Features and Objects , 1994 .

[31]  N. Mai,et al.  Selective disturbance of movement vision after bilateral brain damage. , 1983, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[32]  Ian E. Holliday,et al.  The coding of spatial position by the human visual system: Effects of spatial scale and contrast , 1992, Vision Research.

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

[34]  S. Nishida,et al.  Marker Correspondence, Not Processing Latency, Determines Temporal Binding of Visual Attributes , 2002, Current Biology.

[35]  David Whitney,et al.  The influence of visual motion on perceived position , 2002, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[36]  John Ross,et al.  Direct Evidence That “Speedlines” Influence Motion Mechanisms , 2002, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[37]  S. Zeki,et al.  Toward a Theory of Visual Consciousness , 1999, Consciousness and Cognition.

[38]  S. Nishida,et al.  Time perception: Brain time or event time? , 2001, Current Biology.

[39]  S. Nishida Motion-Based Analysis of Spatial Patterns by the Human Visual System , 2004, Current Biology.

[41]  J. Fodor The Modularity of mind. An essay on faculty psychology , 1986 .

[42]  Szonya Durant,et al.  Latency differences and the flash-lag effect , 2003, Vision Research.

[43]  P. Cavanagh,et al.  A minimum motion technique for judging equiluminance , 1983 .

[44]  Gopathy Purushothaman,et al.  Moving ahead through differential visual latency , 1998, Nature.

[45]  R. Snowden,et al.  Shifts in perceived position following adaptation to visual motion , 1998, Current Biology.

[46]  HighWire Press Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London , 1781, The London Medical Journal.

[47]  D. Hubel,et al.  Segregation of form, color, movement, and depth: anatomy, physiology, and perception. , 1988, Science.

[48]  W. A. V. Grind,et al.  Physical, Neural, and Mental Timing , 2002, Consciousness and Cognition.

[49]  Semir Zeki,et al.  The theory of multistage integration in the visual brain , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[50]  J. Wolfe,et al.  The Psychophysical Evidence for a Binding Problem in Human Vision , 1999, Neuron.