A Pedestal Blocks the Perception of Non-Fourier Motion

Open Access
Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
We wanted to know whether the mechanisms that discriminate the motion of first-order patterns (defined by spatial variations of luminance) differ from those that detect the motion of non-Fourier or second-order patterns (defined by spatial variations of contrast). To address this question we tested whether motion discrimination performance of first-order and second-order patterns was affected by a pedestal (Lu and Sperling, 1995 Vision Research35 2697 – 2722). A pedestal is a static replica of a moving pattern. We used pedestals with contrast or modulation depth twice the value at which it becomes possible to discriminate the direction of a moving pattern. A two-interval forced-choice task was used to determine how direction discrimination varies with contrast of sine gratings (1 cycle deg−1) and modulation depth of amplitude-modulated gratings presented either alone or with a pedestal. The amplitude-modulated gratings had a 5 cycles deg−1 carrier modulated at 1 cycle deg−1. Three different temporal frequencies (1, 3, and 12 Hz) were studied. Performance with sine gratings was unaffected by the pedestal at all temporal frequencies tested. For amplitude-modulated gratings the pedestal raised the modulation depth at which it became possible to discriminate the direction of motion. This elevation in threshold decreased when the mean contrast of the pattern was high. This result shows that immunity to pedestals of texture-contrast patterns (Lu and Sperling, 1996 Journal of the Optical Society of America13 2305 – 2318) does not generalise to other non-Fourier motion stimuli.

This publication has 0 references indexed in Scilit: