Perception of initial moving target signals: Support for a cumulative lateral inhibition theory

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Volumn 32, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 1185-1196

  Geer, Micah ^a   Schmidt, William C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO   (United States)

Author keywords

Attention; Cumulative lateral inhibition theory; Fr hlich effect; Initial moving target signals; Lateral inhibition; Localization; Visibility

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTENTION; HUMAN; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); MOVEMENT PERCEPTION; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY; REACTION TIME; VISION;

ATTENTION; HUMANS; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); MOTION PERCEPTION; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY; REACTION TIME; SIGNAL DETECTION (PSYCHOLOGY); SIGNAL DETECTION, PSYCHOLOGICAL; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 33749433204     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.32.5.1185     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Actis-Grosso, R., & Stucchi, N. (2003). Shifting the start: Backward mislocation of the initial position of a motion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 675-691.
2. Alpern, M. (1953). Metacontrast. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 43, 648-657.
3. Baldo, M. V. C., & Klein, S. A. (1995, December 7). Extrapolation or attention shift? Nature, 378, 565-566.
4. Banks, E. C. (2001). Ernst Mach and the episode of the monocular depth sensations. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 37, 327-348.
5. Breitmeyer, B. G. (1978). Disinhibition in metacontrast masking of vernier acuity targets: Sustained channels inhibit transient channels. Vision Research, 18, 1401-1405.
6. Breitmeyer, B. G., Rudd, M., & Dunn, K. (1981). Metacontrast investigations of sustained-transient channel inhibitory interactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7, 770-779.
7. Bridgeman, B. (1971). Metacontrast and lateral inhibition. Psychological Review, 78, 528-539.
8. Burr, D. C. (1980, March 13). Motion smear. Nature, 284, 164-165.
9. Chen, S., & Ogmen, H. (1995). A target in real motion appears blurred in the absence of other proximal moving targets. Vision Research, 35, 2315-2328.
10. Cornsweet, T. N., & Yellott, J. I., Jr. (1985). Intensity-dependent spatial summation. Journal of the Optical Society of America A: Optics, Image Science, and Vision, 2, 1769-1786.
11. Dagenbach, D., & Carr, T. H. (Eds.). (1994). Inhibitory processes in attention, memory, and language. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
12. Di Lollo, V., & Hogben, J. H. (1985). Suppression of visible persistence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11, 304-316.
13. Di Lollo, V., & Hogben, J. H. (1987). Suppression of visible persistence as a function of spatial separation between inducing stimuli. Perception & Psychophysics, 41, 345-354.
14. Finney, D. J. (1971). Probit analysis (3rd ed.). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
15. Fröhlich, F. W. (1923). Über die messung der Empfindungszeit [Measuring the time of sensation]. Zeitschrift für Sinnesphysiologie, 54, 58-78.
16. Fröhlich, F. W. (1929). Die Empfindungszeit: Ein Beitrag zur Lehre der Zeit-, Raum-, und Bewegungswahrnehmung [Sensation time: A contribution to the doctrine of perception of time, space, and movement]. Jena, Germany: Fischer.
17. Francis, G. (1997). Cortical dynamics of lateral inhibition: Metacontrast masking. Psychological Review, 104, 572-594.
18. Geer, M., & Schmidt, W. (2006a). The Fröhlich effect at the center of attention. Manuscript submitted for publication.
19. Geer, M., & Schmidt, W. (2006b). The Fröhlich effect is modulated by displacement size and eccentricity. Manuscript submitted for publication.
20. Groner, R., Groner, M. T., Bischof, W. F., & Di Lollo, V. (1990). On the relation between metacontrast masking and suppression of visible persistence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 381-390.
21. Hubbard, T. L., & Motes, M. A. (2002). Does representational momentum reflect a distortion of the length or the endpoint of a trajectory? Cognition, 82(3), B89-B99.
22. Hubbard, T. L., & Motes, M. A. (2005). An effect of context on whether memory for initial position exhibits a Fröhlich effect or an onset repulsion effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 58(A), 961-979.
23. Kerzel, D. (2002). Different localization of motion onset with pointing and relative judgments. Experimental Brain Research, 145, 340-350.
24. Kerzel, D., & Gegenfurtner, K. R. (2004). Spatial distortions and processing latencies in the onset repulsion and Fröhlich effects. Vision Research, 44, 577-590.
25. Kerzel, D., Jordan, J., & Müsseler, J. (2001). The role of perception in the mislocalization of the final position of a moving target. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 829-840.
26. Kerzel, D., & Müsseler, J. (2002). Effects of stimulus material on the Fröhlich illusion. Vision Research, 42, 181-189.
27. Khurana, B., & Nijhawan, R. (1995, December 7). Extrapolation or attention shift? Nature, 378, 566.
28. Kirschfeld, K., & Kammer, T. (1999). The Fröhlich effect: A consequence of the interaction of visual focal attention and metacontrast. Vision Research, 39, 3702-3709.
29. Kirschfeld, K., & Kammer, T. (2000). Visual attention and metacontrast modify latency to perception in opposite directions. Vision Research, 40, 1027-1033.
30. Lieberman, H. R. (1983). Computation of psychological thresholds using the probit technique. Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation, 15, 446-448.
31. MacLeod, C. M., Dodd, M. D., Sheard, E. D., Wilson, D. E., & Bibi, U. (2003). In opposition to inhibition. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 43, 163-214.
32. Metzger, W. (1932). An attempt at a common theory of Fröhlich's and Hazelhoff's phenomena and a critique of their procedure for measuring sensation time. Psychologische Forschung, 16, 176-200.
33. Müsseler, J., & Aschersleben, G. (1998). Localizing the first position of a moving stimulus: The Fröhlich effect and an attention-shifting explanation. Perception & Psychophysics, 60, 683-695.
34. Müsseler, J., & Kerzel, D. (2004). The trial context determines adjusted localization of stimuli: Reconciling the Fröhlich and onset repulsion effects. Vision Research, 44, 2201-2206.
35. Müsseler, J., Van der Heijden, A., Mahmud, S., Deubel, H., & Ertsey, S. (1999). Relative mislocalization of briefly presented stimuli in the retinal periphery. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 1646-1661.
36. Nijhawan, R. (1994, July 28). Motion extrapolation in catching. Nature, 370, 256-257.
37. Pieron, H. (1935). Le métacontrast [Metacontrast]. Journal de Psychologie Normale et Pathologique, 32, 651-652.
38. Robinson, D. N. (1966, October 7). Disinhibition of visually masked stimuli. Science, 154, 157-158.
39. Rose, D., & Halpern, D. (1992). Stimulus mislocalization depends on spatial frequency. Perception, 21, 289-296.
40. Rubin, E. (1929). Kritisches und Experimentelles zur 'Empfindungszeit' Fröhlichs [Criticism and experiments on Fröhlich's concept of sensation time]. Psychologische Forschung, 13, 101-112.
41. Schurman, D. L., & Eriksen, C. W. (1969). Summation and interaction of successive masking stimuli in visual perception. American Journal of Psychology, 82, 320-332.
42. Spillmann, L. (1994). The Hermann grid illusion: A tool for studying human perceptive field organization. Perception, 23, 691-708.
43. Thornton, I. M. (2002). The onset repulsion effect. Spatial Vision, 15, 219-243.
44. Von Bekesy, G. (1968). Brightness distribution across the mach bands measured with flicker photometry, and the linearity of sensory nervous interaction. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 58(1), 1-8.
45. Vrolijk, P., & Van der Wildt, G. (1982). Propagating inhibition as a function of flash diameter and duration. Vision Research, 22, 401-406.
46. Whitney, D., & Cavanagh, P. (2000, August 18). The position of moving objects. Science, 289, 1107.
47. Whitney, D., & Cavanagh, P. (2002). Surrounding motion affects the perceived locations of moving stimuli. Visual Cognition, 9, 139-152.
48. Whitney, D., & Murakami, I. (1998). Latency difference, not spatial extrapolation. Nature Neuroscience, 1, 656-657.