Lecture 14 - Objects in Motion Flashcards
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)
- movement of one object results in the perception of movement in another object (moving clouds may make the moon
appear to move).
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:
- Control condition – two dots in different positions are flashed simultaneously
- Real motion - a small dot is moved back and forth
- Apparent motion - dots are flashed so they appear to move
Results:
- Control condition: each fixed dot (FD) activated a separate area of visual cortex.
– 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
- Thus, the perception of motion in both cases is related to the same brain mechanism: can’t be cause by bottom up because there is no actual distal stimulus with apparent motion
- But what is that mechanism?
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
- observing a small portion of a larger stimulus may lead to misleading (ambiguous) info about the direction of movement
– 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.
- This may occur in the middle temporal (MT) cortex, which is located in the where/how stream and then later converges on MST
- Evidence for this has been found in the MT cortex of monkeys.
Firing and coherence experiment by Newsome et al. (1989)
- Coherence of movement of dot patterns was varied.
– 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.
- the responses in MT and the judgment (how accurate they were) were corrleated to the level of activation in MT;
more coherent motion meant there was more feedforward activation from V1 (all the same direction, lots of little apertures all going in the same direction) converged in MT and the cells in MT therefore had more activation, and thus the monkeys were more accurate - the activity in MT seems to be associated with what was happening in the distal stimuli and the perception of the distal stimuli