Spatial Offset of Test Field Elements from Surround Elements Affects the Strength of Motion Aftereffects

Static movement aftereffects (MAEs) were measured after adaptation to vertical square-wave luminance gratings drifting horizontally within a central window in a surrounding stationary vertical grating. The relationship between the stationary test grating and the surround was manipulated by varying t...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Perception (London) 2008-01, Vol.37 (7), p.1010-1021
Hauptverfasser: Harris, John, Sullivan, Daniel, Oakley, Madeleine
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1021
container_issue 7
container_start_page 1010
container_title Perception (London)
container_volume 37
creator Harris, John
Sullivan, Daniel
Oakley, Madeleine
description Static movement aftereffects (MAEs) were measured after adaptation to vertical square-wave luminance gratings drifting horizontally within a central window in a surrounding stationary vertical grating. The relationship between the stationary test grating and the surround was manipulated by varying the alignment of the stationary stripes in the window and those in the surround, and the type of outline separating the window and the surround [no outline, black outline (invisible on black stripes), and red outline (visible throughout its length)]. Offsetting the stripes in the window significantly increased both the duration and ratings of the strength of MAEs. Manipulating the outline had no significant effect on either measure of MAE strength. In a second experiment, in which the stationary test fields alone were presented, participants judged how segregated the test field appeared from its surround. In contrast to the MAE measures, outline as well as offset contributed to judged segregation. In a third experiment, in which test-stripe offset was systematically manipulated, segregation ratings rose with offset. However, MAE strength was greater at medium than at either small or large (180° phase shift) offsets. The effects of these manipulations on the MAE are interpreted in terms of a spatial mechanism which integrates motion signals along collinear contours of the test field and surround, and so causes a reduction of motion contrast at the edges of the test field.
doi_str_mv 10.1068/p6001
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_69524873</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1068_p6001</sage_id><sourcerecordid>69524873</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c266t-56968bdf1d5d1125dbaf238836e45ee6470eafb88da203fe518c9521ad58f4593</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpd0EFLwzAUB_AgiptzX0GCoLdq0jRpdhxjU2Gyw-a5pO3L1tE2NUkPfnszO1A8PXj58Sfvj9CUkidKhHzuBCH0Ao1pImSUxIxdojFhhEaECDFCN84dA0hmnF2jEZVpytI4GaPDtlO-UjXeaO3AY6PxDpzHqwrqEi9raKD1DmtrGrztrTV9-2c91xqKMP0B8NZbaPf-cIp4N74ybXj2YGEwt-hKq9rB9Dwn6GO13C1eo_Xm5W0xX0dFLISPuJgJmZealrykNOZlrnTMpGQCEg4gkpSA0rmUpYoJ08CpLGY8pqrkUid8xiboccjtrPnswylZU7kC6lq1YHqXiaATmbIAHwZYWONc-GbW2apR9iujJDtVmv1UGtzdObDPGyh_1bnDAO4H4NQesqPpbRsO_JfyDVrue9M</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>69524873</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Spatial Offset of Test Field Elements from Surround Elements Affects the Strength of Motion Aftereffects</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SAGE Complete A-Z List</source><creator>Harris, John ; Sullivan, Daniel ; Oakley, Madeleine</creator><creatorcontrib>Harris, John ; Sullivan, Daniel ; Oakley, Madeleine</creatorcontrib><description>Static movement aftereffects (MAEs) were measured after adaptation to vertical square-wave luminance gratings drifting horizontally within a central window in a surrounding stationary vertical grating. The relationship between the stationary test grating and the surround was manipulated by varying the alignment of the stationary stripes in the window and those in the surround, and the type of outline separating the window and the surround [no outline, black outline (invisible on black stripes), and red outline (visible throughout its length)]. Offsetting the stripes in the window significantly increased both the duration and ratings of the strength of MAEs. Manipulating the outline had no significant effect on either measure of MAE strength. In a second experiment, in which the stationary test fields alone were presented, participants judged how segregated the test field appeared from its surround. In contrast to the MAE measures, outline as well as offset contributed to judged segregation. In a third experiment, in which test-stripe offset was systematically manipulated, segregation ratings rose with offset. However, MAE strength was greater at medium than at either small or large (180° phase shift) offsets. The effects of these manipulations on the MAE are interpreted in terms of a spatial mechanism which integrates motion signals along collinear contours of the test field and surround, and so causes a reduction of motion contrast at the edges of the test field.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0301-0066</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1468-4233</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1068/p6001</identifier><identifier>PMID: 18773724</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London, England: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Adaptation, Ocular ; Adult ; Attention ; Cues ; Figural Aftereffect ; Form Perception - physiology ; Humans ; Motion Perception - physiology ; Psychophysics ; Sensory Thresholds</subject><ispartof>Perception (London), 2008-01, Vol.37 (7), p.1010-1021</ispartof><rights>2008 SAGE Publications</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c266t-56968bdf1d5d1125dbaf238836e45ee6470eafb88da203fe518c9521ad58f4593</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1068/p6001$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/p6001$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,21800,27905,27906,43602,43603</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18773724$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Harris, John</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sullivan, Daniel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oakley, Madeleine</creatorcontrib><title>Spatial Offset of Test Field Elements from Surround Elements Affects the Strength of Motion Aftereffects</title><title>Perception (London)</title><addtitle>Perception</addtitle><description>Static movement aftereffects (MAEs) were measured after adaptation to vertical square-wave luminance gratings drifting horizontally within a central window in a surrounding stationary vertical grating. The relationship between the stationary test grating and the surround was manipulated by varying the alignment of the stationary stripes in the window and those in the surround, and the type of outline separating the window and the surround [no outline, black outline (invisible on black stripes), and red outline (visible throughout its length)]. Offsetting the stripes in the window significantly increased both the duration and ratings of the strength of MAEs. Manipulating the outline had no significant effect on either measure of MAE strength. In a second experiment, in which the stationary test fields alone were presented, participants judged how segregated the test field appeared from its surround. In contrast to the MAE measures, outline as well as offset contributed to judged segregation. In a third experiment, in which test-stripe offset was systematically manipulated, segregation ratings rose with offset. However, MAE strength was greater at medium than at either small or large (180° phase shift) offsets. The effects of these manipulations on the MAE are interpreted in terms of a spatial mechanism which integrates motion signals along collinear contours of the test field and surround, and so causes a reduction of motion contrast at the edges of the test field.</description><subject>Adaptation, Ocular</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Attention</subject><subject>Cues</subject><subject>Figural Aftereffect</subject><subject>Form Perception - physiology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Motion Perception - physiology</subject><subject>Psychophysics</subject><subject>Sensory Thresholds</subject><issn>0301-0066</issn><issn>1468-4233</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2008</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpd0EFLwzAUB_AgiptzX0GCoLdq0jRpdhxjU2Gyw-a5pO3L1tE2NUkPfnszO1A8PXj58Sfvj9CUkidKhHzuBCH0Ao1pImSUxIxdojFhhEaECDFCN84dA0hmnF2jEZVpytI4GaPDtlO-UjXeaO3AY6PxDpzHqwrqEi9raKD1DmtrGrztrTV9-2c91xqKMP0B8NZbaPf-cIp4N74ybXj2YGEwt-hKq9rB9Dwn6GO13C1eo_Xm5W0xX0dFLISPuJgJmZealrykNOZlrnTMpGQCEg4gkpSA0rmUpYoJ08CpLGY8pqrkUid8xiboccjtrPnswylZU7kC6lq1YHqXiaATmbIAHwZYWONc-GbW2apR9iujJDtVmv1UGtzdObDPGyh_1bnDAO4H4NQesqPpbRsO_JfyDVrue9M</recordid><startdate>20080101</startdate><enddate>20080101</enddate><creator>Harris, John</creator><creator>Sullivan, Daniel</creator><creator>Oakley, Madeleine</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20080101</creationdate><title>Spatial Offset of Test Field Elements from Surround Elements Affects the Strength of Motion Aftereffects</title><author>Harris, John ; Sullivan, Daniel ; Oakley, Madeleine</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c266t-56968bdf1d5d1125dbaf238836e45ee6470eafb88da203fe518c9521ad58f4593</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2008</creationdate><topic>Adaptation, Ocular</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Attention</topic><topic>Cues</topic><topic>Figural Aftereffect</topic><topic>Form Perception - physiology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Motion Perception - physiology</topic><topic>Psychophysics</topic><topic>Sensory Thresholds</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Harris, John</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sullivan, Daniel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oakley, Madeleine</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Perception (London)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Harris, John</au><au>Sullivan, Daniel</au><au>Oakley, Madeleine</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Spatial Offset of Test Field Elements from Surround Elements Affects the Strength of Motion Aftereffects</atitle><jtitle>Perception (London)</jtitle><addtitle>Perception</addtitle><date>2008-01-01</date><risdate>2008</risdate><volume>37</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>1010</spage><epage>1021</epage><pages>1010-1021</pages><issn>0301-0066</issn><eissn>1468-4233</eissn><abstract>Static movement aftereffects (MAEs) were measured after adaptation to vertical square-wave luminance gratings drifting horizontally within a central window in a surrounding stationary vertical grating. The relationship between the stationary test grating and the surround was manipulated by varying the alignment of the stationary stripes in the window and those in the surround, and the type of outline separating the window and the surround [no outline, black outline (invisible on black stripes), and red outline (visible throughout its length)]. Offsetting the stripes in the window significantly increased both the duration and ratings of the strength of MAEs. Manipulating the outline had no significant effect on either measure of MAE strength. In a second experiment, in which the stationary test fields alone were presented, participants judged how segregated the test field appeared from its surround. In contrast to the MAE measures, outline as well as offset contributed to judged segregation. In a third experiment, in which test-stripe offset was systematically manipulated, segregation ratings rose with offset. However, MAE strength was greater at medium than at either small or large (180° phase shift) offsets. The effects of these manipulations on the MAE are interpreted in terms of a spatial mechanism which integrates motion signals along collinear contours of the test field and surround, and so causes a reduction of motion contrast at the edges of the test field.</abstract><cop>London, England</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>18773724</pmid><doi>10.1068/p6001</doi><tpages>12</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0301-0066
ispartof Perception (London), 2008-01, Vol.37 (7), p.1010-1021
issn 0301-0066
1468-4233
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_69524873
source MEDLINE; SAGE Complete A-Z List
subjects Adaptation, Ocular
Adult
Attention
Cues
Figural Aftereffect
Form Perception - physiology
Humans
Motion Perception - physiology
Psychophysics
Sensory Thresholds
title Spatial Offset of Test Field Elements from Surround Elements Affects the Strength of Motion Aftereffects
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-18T10%3A58%3A54IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Spatial%20Offset%20of%20Test%20Field%20Elements%20from%20Surround%20Elements%20Affects%20the%20Strength%20of%20Motion%20Aftereffects&rft.jtitle=Perception%20(London)&rft.au=Harris,%20John&rft.date=2008-01-01&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=1010&rft.epage=1021&rft.pages=1010-1021&rft.issn=0301-0066&rft.eissn=1468-4233&rft_id=info:doi/10.1068/p6001&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E69524873%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=69524873&rft_id=info:pmid/18773724&rft_sage_id=10.1068_p6001&rfr_iscdi=true