Comparisons of flashILM, transformational apparent motion, and polarized gamma motion indicate these are three independent and separable illusions.

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Ha, HyunYoung en
dc.contributor.author Hamm, Jeffrey en
dc.date.accessioned 2019-06-14T02:15:27Z en
dc.date.issued 2019-02 en
dc.identifier.issn 1943-3921 en
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/2292/47048 en
dc.description.abstract Illusory line motion (ILM) refers to perceived motion in a bar when it is presented all at once. Explanations for ILM include low-level visual accounts, visual attention, and object tracking. These explanations tend to arise from studies using different protocols to induce ILM, based on the assumption that the same illusion is being generated. Using real motion in the same and in the opposite direction as the ILM quantifies the illusions from all protocols as the area between response curves for the left- and right-side inducers. This common measure enables testing of the assumption that two display configurations result in the same illusion. If there is a common underlying cause, an individual who shows a strong illusion in one situation should show a strong illusion in the other, but illusions that arise through different systems should not correlate. This approach has differentiated ILM induced by a flash (flashILM) from ILM induced by matching the bar to an attribute of the inducing stimuli (transformational apparent motion, TAM). The former is thought to reflect attention, while the latter is thought to reflect object processing. Low-level visual explanations are often offered based on ILM that occurs when the bar is adjacent to only a single inducer (polarized gamma motion, PGM) rather than between two stimuli (flashILM and TAM). The present study replicates the independence of flashILM and TAM and shows that neither is related to PGM, suggesting that all three explanations for ILM are warranted and that the debates in the literature are conflating at least three different illusions. en
dc.format.medium Print en
dc.language eng en
dc.relation.ispartofseries Attention, perception & psychophysics en
dc.rights Items in ResearchSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated. Previously published items are made available in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. en
dc.rights.uri https://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/docs/uoa-docs/rights.htm en
dc.subject Humans en
dc.subject Photic Stimulation en
dc.subject Optical Illusions en
dc.subject Motion Perception en
dc.subject Attention en
dc.subject Adult en
dc.subject Female en
dc.subject Male en
dc.subject Young Adult en
dc.title Comparisons of flashILM, transformational apparent motion, and polarized gamma motion indicate these are three independent and separable illusions. en
dc.type Journal Article en
dc.identifier.doi 10.3758/s13414-018-1632-6 en
pubs.issue 2 en
pubs.begin-page 517 en
pubs.volume 81 en
dc.rights.holder Copyright: The author en
pubs.end-page 532 en
pubs.publication-status Published en
dc.rights.accessrights http://purl.org/eprint/accessRights/RestrictedAccess en
pubs.subtype Journal Article en
pubs.elements-id 758550 en
pubs.org-id Science en
pubs.org-id Psychology en
dc.identifier.eissn 1943-393X en
pubs.record-created-at-source-date 2018-11-30 en
pubs.dimensions-id 30488188 en


Files in this item

There are no files associated with this item.

Find Full text

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Share

Search ResearchSpace


Browse

Statistics