| ABOUT US | ARCHIVES | LINKS | RSS FEED | MONDAYS | |

3quarksdaily

An Eclectic Digest of Science, Art and Literature

« Monday Poem | Main | The Thirty-Third Internet Connection in New Delhi »

July 18, 2011

All things change; nothing is extinguished

by George Wilkinson

The Motion Aftereffect illusion, or Waterfall illusion, occurs when prolonged viewing of motion in one Choushi-waterfall direction makes a subsequently viewed stationary item appear to move in the opposite direction. An example is seen in this short video. The viewer fixates on a stationary blue point near a pattern moving toward the top of the screen. When the pattern is replaced with a fixed photograph of a waterfall, the water appears to flow toward the bottom. We see motion because our visual system adapted to the upward motion of the first stimulus, and that adaptation carries over for a few seconds affecting our perception of the stationary image.

This illusion is thought to reflect adaptation of neurons in the visual cortex responsible for detecting motion. In this model, overall motion perception results from a comparison of the relative firing patterns among neurons sensitive to diverse specific directions of motion. A stationary scene results in balanced outputs for all directions. In the classical Motion Aftereffect illusion, prolonged stimulation with one direction of motion leads to decreased output by the neurons sensitive to that direction of motion. When the stimulus is removed, output from that set of neurons remains lowered. But because the output from the other motion-sensitive neurons is higher by comparison, the resultant imbalance creates the perception of motion opposite to the original moving stimulus.

Althoug classical studies of the Motion Aftereffect illusion used a conditioning stimulus lasting several seconds, it is known that neuronal adaptation can occur much more quickly-- on a timescale of milliseconds. Could perceptual adaptation be observed at brief timescales, relevant to the timescales in which neurons adapt? A recent study from the lab of Duje Tadin finds that the Motion aftereffect illusion can be observed even after very brief exposure to a moving stimulus. Subjects shown a video of a pattern that is moving for only 1/40 of a second (25 milliseconds) – so short that they can’t consciously distinguish its direction of motion – will then perceive motion in the opposite direction of the briefly presented background motion when viewing a stationary object. The implication of their results is that the cortical processes involved in the Motion Aftereffect illusion could affect our perception virtually every time we view motion. The work of this lab and others suggest that there may be more than one brain region, and more than one neuronal circuit, contributing to this class of illusion.

Posted by George Wilkinson at 12:10 AM | Permalink

Comments

Post a comment






Subscribe to this blog's feed  

PayAnywhere with iphone credit card swiper

Android Tablet

Bluetooth Headset

2013 New Style Dresses

Compare Car Rental Prices

DHgate.com Wholesale

3QD on Facebook

3QD on Kindle

3QD by Daily Email

Receive all blogposts at the same time every day.

Enter your Email:


Preview 3QD Email

3QD on Twitter

Miscellany

Lijit Search

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Add to Google

Recent Comments

Elatia Harris on Here He Goes Again: Sam Harris’s Falsehoods

Brad Wilson on Here He Goes Again: Sam Harris’s Falsehoods

Ben Schwartz on Here He Goes Again: Sam Harris’s Falsehoods

X on Physics’s Pangolin

jo smith on What is ‘smart’ and how does it fit our consciousness?

Jesse M. on NAPOLEON CHAGNON: BLOOD IS THEIR ARGUMENT

David Clausen on Psychiatry’s mistaken manual

Abbas Raza on Poetry in Translation

musafir on My Father: A Veteran's Story

roger gathmann on NAPOLEON CHAGNON: BLOOD IS THEIR ARGUMENT

Norman Costa on Physics’s Pangolin

Norman Costa on Physics’s Pangolin

prasad on What is ‘smart’ and how does it fit our consciousness?

Frans on The Epistemology of Hatred: A Case Study of Irish Bogs

jh on Moving books

Sundar on What is ‘smart’ and how does it fit our consciousness?

Brad Wilson on Physics’s Pangolin

Brad Wilson on What is ‘smart’ and how does it fit our consciousness?

dr h s saini on the pao of love (part one)

joyce marie costa ingraham on My Father: A Veteran's Story

X on Physics’s Pangolin

Gaddeswarup on What is ‘smart’ and how does it fit our consciousness?

Raza Husain on Physics’s Pangolin

gaddeswarup on What is ‘smart’ and how does it fit our consciousness?

nogodrod on messages sent from the dawn of history

Acclaim For 3QD


"I couldn't tear myself away from 3 Quarks Daily, to the point of neglecting my work. Congratulations on this superb site."—Steven Pinker, Johnstone Professor of Psychology, Harvard University.

"I have placed 3 Quarks Daily at the head of my list of web bookmarks."—Richard Dawkins, Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University.

"Just wanted you to know I’m one of many who reads and enjoys 3 Quarks....almost daily."—David Byrne, musician, former lead-singer of the Talking Heads, artist, intellectual.

Read more here.

The 3QD Prizes

Subscribe to this blog's feed