Attention, dyslexia, and the line-motion illusion

Optometry and Vision Science

Volumn 83, Issue 11, 2006, Pages 843-849

  Skottun, Bernt Christian ^a   Skoyles, John Robert ^b,c  

^a Skottun Research   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^c LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Apparent motion; Attention; Dyslexia; Magnocellular; Movement perception; Vision

Indexed keywords

MEDICAL PROBLEMS; VISION;

APPARENT MOTION; ATTENTION; DYSLEXIA; MAGNOCELLULAR SYSTEMS; MOVEMENT PERCEPTION;

BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING;

ATTENTION DEFICIT DISORDER; DYSLEXIA; HUMAN; ILLUSION; MOVEMENT PERCEPTION; PERCEPTION DISORDER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; READING; REVIEW; SENSORY DYSFUNCTION; VISUAL STIMULATION; VISUAL SYSTEM;

ATTENTION; DYSLEXIA; HUMANS; MOTION PERCEPTION; OPTICAL ILLUSIONS; PROGNOSIS;

EID: 33751022611     PISSN: 10405488     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.opx.0000233645.60607.0b     Document Type: Review

References (80)

1. Habib M. The neurological basis of developmental dyslexia: an overview and working hypothesis. Brain 2000;123:2373-99.
2. Manis FR, McBride-Chang C, Seidenberg MS, Keating P, Doi LM, Munson B, Petersen A. Are speech perception deficits associated with developmental dyslexia? J Exp Child Psychol 1997;66:211-35.
3. Nagarajan S, Mahncke H, Salz T, Tallal P, Roberts T, Merzenich MM. Cortical auditory signal processing in poor readers. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1999;96:6483-8.
4. Galaburda AM, Sherman GF, Rosen GD, Aboitiz F, Geschwind N. Developmental dyslexia: four consecutive patients with cortical anomalies. Ann Neurol 1985;18:222-33.
5. Wolf M, Bowers PG. Naming-speed processes and developmental reading disabilities: an introduction to the special issue on the double-deficit hypothesis. J Learn Disabil 2000;33:322-4.
6. Nicolson RI, Fawcett AJ, Dean P. Developmental dyslexia: the cerebellar deficit hypothesis. Trends Neurosci 2001;24:508-11.
7. Farmer ME, Klein RM. The evidence for a temporal processing deficit linked to dyslexia: a review. Psychonom Bull Rev 1995;2:460-93.
8. Lovegrove W, Martin F, Slaghuis W. A theoretical and experimental case for a visual deficit in specific reading disability. Cognit Neuropsychol 1986;3:225-67.
9. Stein J, Walsh V. To see but not to read; the magnocellular theory of dyslexia. Trends Neurosci 1997;20:147-52.
10. Shapley R, Perry VH. Cat and monkey retinal ganglion cells and their visual functional roles. Trends Neurosci 1986;9:229-35.
11. Merigan WH, Maunsell JH. How parallel are the primate visual pathways? Annu Rev Neurosci 1993;16:369-402.
12. Hendry SH, Reid RC. The koniocellular pathway in primate vision. Annu Rev Neurosci 2000;23:127-53.
13. Breitmeyer BG. Unmasking visual masking: a look at the 'why' behind the veil of the 'how.' Psychol Rev 1980;87:52-69.
14. Breitmeyer BG. The roles of sustained and transient channels in reading and reading disability. In: Wright SF, Groner R, eds. Facets of Dyslexia and Its Remediation. New York: Elsevier Science Publishers, 1993:13-31.
15. Burr DC, Morrone MC, Ross J. Selective suppression of the magnocellular visual pathway during saccadic eye movements. Nature 1994;371:511-3.
16. Hogben JH. How does a visual transient deficit affect reading? In: Hulme C, Snowling M, eds. Dyslexia: Biology, Cognition and Intervention. London: Whurr Publishers, 1997:59-71.
17. Skottun BC, Parke LA. The possible relationship between visual deficits and dyslexia: examination of a critical assumption. J Learn Disabil 1999;32:2-5.
18. Stein J, Talcott J. Impaired neuronal timing in developmental dyslexia - the magnocellular hypothesis. Dyslexia 1999;5:59-77.
19. Stein J. The neurobiology of reading difficulties. Prostaglandins Leukot Essent Fatty Acids 2000;63:109-16.
20. Evans BJ, Drasdo N, Richards IL. Investigation of accommodative and binocular function in dyslexia. Ophthal Physiol Opt 1994;14:5-19.
21. Cornelissen P, Bradley L, Fowler S, Stein J. What children see affects how they read. Dev Med Child Neurol 1991;33:755-62.
22. Kiely PM, Crewther SG, Crewther DP. Is there an association between functional vision and learning to read? Clin Exp Optom 2001;84:346-53.
23. Skoyles J, Skottun BC. On the prevalence of magnocellular deficits in the visual system of non-dyslexic individuals. Brain Lang 2004;88:79-82.
24. Stein J. Visual motion sensitivity and reading. Neuropsychologia 2003;41:1785-93.
25. Vidyasagar TR. Neural underpinnings of dyslexia as disorder of visuo-spatial attention. Clin Exp Optom 2004;87:4-10.
26. Skottun BC, Skoyles J. Attention, reading, and dyslexia. Clin Exp Optom 2006;89:241-5.
27. Steinman SB, Steinman BA, Garzia RP. Vision and attention. II: Is visual attention a mechanism through which a deficient magnocellular pathway might cause reading disability? Optom Vis Sci 1998;75:674-81.
28. Steinman BA, Steinman SB, Lehmkuhle S. Transient visual attention is dominated by the magnocellular stream. Vision Res 1997;37:17-23.
29. Hikosaka O, Miyauchi S, Shimojo S. Focal visual attention produces illusory temporal order and motion sensation. Vision Res 1993;33:1219-40.
30. Hikosaka O, Miyauchi S, Shimojo S. Voluntary and stimulus-induced attention detected as motion sensation. Perception 1993;22:517-26.
31. von Grunau M, Faubert J. Intraattribute and interattribute motion induction. Perception 1994;23:913-28.
32. Faubert J, von Grunau M. The influence of two spatially distinct primers and attribute priming on motion induction. Vision Res 1995;35:3119-30.
33. Faubert J, von Grunau M. Split attention and attribute priming in motion induction. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1992;33 (suppl):1139.
34. Tse PU, Logothetis NK. The duration of 3-d form analysis in transformational apparent motion. Percept Psychophys 2002;64:244-65.
35. Tse P, Cavanagh P, Nakayama K. The role of parsing in high-level motion processing. In: Watanabe T, ed. High-Level Motion Processing: Computational, Neurobiological and Psychophysical Perspectives. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1998:249-66.
36. Kawahara J, Yokosawa K, Nishida S, Sato T. Illusory line motion in visual search: attentional facilitation or apparent motion? Perception 1996;25:901-20.
37. Downing PE, Treisman AM. The line-motion illusion: attention or impletion? J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 1997;23:768-79.
38. Eagleman DM, Sejnowski TJ. The line-motion illusion can be reversed by motion signals after the line disappears. Perception 2003;32:963-8.
39. Tse P, Cavanagh P. Line motion occurs after surface parsing. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1995;36:S417.
40. Holcombe AO. Occlusion cues resolve sudden onsets into morphing or line motion, disocclusion, and sudden materialization. J Vis 2003;3:562-72.
41. von Grunau M, Dube S, Kwas M. Two contributions of motion induction: a preattentive effect and facilitation due to attentional capture. Vision Res 1996;36:2447-57.
42. Tse P, Cavanagh P, Nakayama K. The roles of attention in shape change apparent motion. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1996;37:S213.
43. von Grunau M, Saikali Z, Faubert J. Processing speed in the motion-induction effect. Perception 1995;24:477-90.
44. Bavelier D, Schneider KA, Monacelli A. Reflexive gaze orienting induces the line-motion illusion. Vision Res 2002;42:2817-27.
45. Cohn TE, Lasley DJ. Detectability of a luminance increment: effect of spatial uncertainty. J Opt Soc Am 1974;64:1715-9.
46. Palmer J, Ames CT, Lindsey DT. Measuring the effect of attention on simple visual search. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 1993;19:108-30.
47. Schmidt WC, Klein RM. A spatial gradient of acceleration and temporal extension underlies three illusions of motion. Perception 1997;26:857-74.
48. Baloch AA, Grossberg S. A neural model of high-level motion processing: line motion and formotion dynamics. Vision Res 1997;37:3037-59.
49. Steinman BA, Steinman SB, Lehmkuhle S. Visual attention mechanisms show a center-surround organization. Vision Res 1995;35:1859-69.
50. Allman J, Miezin F, McGuinness E. Stimulus specific responses from beyond the classical receptive field: neurophysiological mechanisms for local-global comparisons in visual neurons. Annu Rev Neurosci 1985;8:407-30.
51. Cornelissen P, Richardson A, Mason A, Fowler S, Stein J. Contrast sensitivity and coherent motion detection measured at photopic luminance levels in dyslexics and controls. Vision Res 1995;35:1483-94.
52. Cornelissen PL, Hansen PC, Hutton JL, Evangelinou V, Stein JF. Magnocellular visual function and children's single word reading. Vision Res 1998;38:471-82.
53. Eden GF, VanMeter JW, Rumsey JM, Maisog JM, Woods RP, Zeffiro TA. Abnormal processing of visual motion in dyslexia revealed by functional brain imaging. Nature 1996;382:66-9.
54. Skottun BC. The magnocellular deficit theory of dyslexia: the evidence from contrast sensitivity. Vision Res 2000;40:111-27.
55. Martin F, Lovegrove W. Flicker contrast sensitivity in normal and specifically disabled readers. Perception 1987;16:215-21.
56. Gross-Glenn K, Skottun BC, Glenn W, Kushch A, Lingua R, Dunbar M, Jallad B, Lubs HA, Levin B, Rabin M, Parke LA, Duara R. Contrast sensitivity in dyslexia. Vis Neurosci 1995;12:153-63.
57. Snowden RJ. Visual attention to color: parvocellular guidance of attentional resources? Psychol Sci 2002;13:180-4.
58. De Valois RL, De Valois KK. Spatial Vision. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1988.
59. Folk CL, Remington RW, Johnston JC. Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 1992;18:1030-44.
60. Rayner K. Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychol Bull 1998;124:372-422.
61. Peli E, Garcia-Perez MA. Contrast sensitivity in dyslexia: deficit or artifact? Optom Vis Sci 1997;74:986-90.
62. Stuart GW, McAnally KI, Castles A. Can contrast sensitivity functions in dyslexia be explained by inattention rather than a magnocellular deficit? Vision Res 2001;41:3205-11.
63. Davis C, Castles A, McAnally K, Gray J. Lapses of concentration and dyslexic performance on the Ternus task. Cognition 2001;81:B21-31.
64. Roach NW, Edwards VT, Hogben JH. The tale is in the tail: an alternative hypothesis for psychophysical performance variability in dyslexia. Perception 2004;33:817-30.
65. Martin F, Lovegrove W. The effects of field size and luminance on contrast sensitivity differences between specifically reading disabled and normal children. Neuropsychologia 1984;22:73-7.
66. Lovegrove WJ, Bwoling A, Badcock B, Blackwood M. Specific reading disability: differences in contrast sensitivity as a function of spatial frequency. Science 1980;210:439-40.
67. Stein J. The magnocellular theory of developmental dyslexia. Dyslexia 2001;7:12-36.
68. Skottun BC, Skoyles JR. Letter to the editor. J Learn Disabil 2005;38:386.
69. Amitay S, Ben-Yehudah G, Banai K, Ahissar M. Disabled readers suffer from visual and auditory impairments but not from a specific magnocellular deficit. Brain 2002;125:2272-85.
70. Victor JD, Conte MM, Burton L, Nass RD. Visual evoked potentials in dyslexics and normals: failure to find a difference in transient or steady-state responses. Vis Neurosci 1993;10:939-46.
71. Johannes S, Kussmaul CL, Munte TF, Mangun GR. Developmental dyslexia: passive visual stimulation provides no evidence for a magnocellular processing defect. Neuropsychologia 1996;34:1123-7.
72. Wilkins AJ, Sihra N, Myers A. Increasing reading speed by using colours: issues concerning reliability and specificity, and their theoretical and practical implications. Perception 2005;34:109-20.
73. Skottun BC. On the use of metacontrast to assess magnocellular function in dyslexic readers. Percept Psychophys 2001;63:1271-4.
74. Skottun BC. On the use of the Ternus test to assess magnocellular function. Perception 2001;30:1449-57.
75. Skottun BC. On the use of red stimuli to isolate magnocellular responses in psychophysical experiments: a perspective. Vis Neurosci 2004;21:63-8.
76. Skottun BC. On visual persistence and magnocellular sensitivity. In: Tobias HD, ed. Focus on Dyslexia Research. New York: Nova Biomedical Books, 2004:41-56.
77. Skottun BC, Skoyles JR. Some remarks on the use of motion VEPs to assess magnocellular sensitivity. Clin Neurophysiol 2004;115:2834-8.
78. Skottun BC, Skoyles JR. The use of phantom contours to isolate magnocellular and parvocellular responses. Int J Neurosci 2006;116:315-20.
79. Skottun B, Skoyles J. On the use of yellow filters to selectively enhance magnocellular responses. Int J Neurosci (in press).
80. Skottun BC, Skoyles JR. Is coherent motion an appropriate test for magnocellular sensitivity? Brain Cogn 2006;61:172-80.