Attentional sampling of multiple wagon wheels

Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics

Volumn 76, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 64-72

  Macdonald, James S P ^a   Cavanagh, Patrick ^b   VanRullen, Rufin ^c,d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITÉ PARIS DESCARTES   (France)

^c Brain and Cognition Research Center in Toulouse   (France)

^d CNRS   (France)

Author keywords

Attention: divided attention and inattention; Motion: 2D; Temporal processing

Indexed keywords

ADAPTATION; ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; CLINICAL TRIAL; FEMALE; HUMAN; ILLUSION; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MOTION; MOVEMENT PERCEPTION; NORMAL DISTRIBUTION; NORMAL HUMAN; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PHYSIOLOGY; YOUNG ADULT;

ADAPTATION, PHYSIOLOGICAL; ADULT; ATTENTION; DATA DISPLAY; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); FEMALE; HEALTHY VOLUNTEERS; HUMANS; ILLUSIONS; MOTION; MOTION PERCEPTION; NORMAL DISTRIBUTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84890726524     PISSN: 19433921     EISSN: 1943393X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13414-013-0555-5     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Alvarez, G. A., & Cavanagh, P. (2005). Independent resources for attentional tracking in the left and right visual hemifields. Psychological Science, 16(8), 637.
2. Andrews, T. J., & Purves, D. (2005). The wagon-wheel illusion in continuous light. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(6), 261-263.
3. Cavanagh, P. (1992). Attention-based motion perception. Science (New York, N. Y.), 257(5076), 1563-1565.
4. Chaudhuri, A. (1990). Modulation of the motion aftereffect by selective attention. Nature, 344(6261), 60-62. doi: 10. 1038/344060a0.
5. Crick, F., & Koch, C. (2003). A framework for consciousness. Nature Neuroscience, 6(2), 119-126. doi: 10. 1038/nn0203-119.
6. Dumoulin, S. O., Baker, C. L., Jr., Hess, R. F., & Evans, A. C. (2003). Cortical specialization for processing first- and second-order motion. Cerebral Cortex (New York, N. Y.: 1991), 13(12), 1375-1385.
7. Holcombe, A. O., & Chen, W.-Y. (2013). Splitting attention reduces temporal resolution from 7 Hz for tracking one object to <3 Hz when tracking three. Journal of Vision, 13(1). doi: 10. 1167/13. 1. 12.
8. Holcombe, A. O., Clifford, C. W. G., Eagleman, D. M., & Pakarian, P. (2005). Illusory motion reversal in tune with motion detectors. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(12), 559-560. doi: 10. 1016/j. tics. 2005. 10. 009. author reply 560-1.
9. Holcombe, A. O., & Seizova-Cajic, T. (2008). Illusory motion reversals from unambiguous motion with visual, proprioceptive, and tactile stimuli. Vision Research, 48(17), 1743-1757.
10. Jans, B., Peters, J. C., & De Weerd, P. (2010). Visual spatial attention to multiple locations at once: The jury is still out. Psychological Review, 117(2), 637-684. doi: 10. 1037/a0019082.
11. Kline, K. A., & Eagleman, D. M. (2008). Evidence against the temporal subsampling account of illusory motion reversal. Journal of Vision, 8(4), 13. 1-5. doi: 10. 1167/8. 4. 13.
12. Kline, K. A., Holcombe, A. O., & Eagleman, D. M. (2004). Illusory motion reversal is caused by rivalry, not by perceptual snapshots of the visual field. Vision Research, 44(23), 2653-2658. doi: 10. 1016/j. visres. 2004. 05. 030.
13. Kline, K. A., Holcombe, A. O., & Eagleman, D. M. (2006). Illusory motion reversal does not imply discrete processing: Reply to Rojas et al. Vision Research, 46(6-7), 1158-1159.
14. Koch, C. (2004). The quest for consciousness: A neurobiological approach. Roberts & Co.
15. Lu, Z. L., & Sperling, G. (1995). Attention-generated apparent motion. Nature, 377(6546), 237-239. doi: 10. 1038/377237a0.
16. Mather, G., Pavan, A., Campana, G., & Casco, C. (2008). The motion aftereffect reloaded. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(12), 481-487. doi: 10. 1016/j. tics. 2008. 09. 002.
17. McComas, A. J., & Cupido, C. M. (1999). The RULER model. Is this how the somatosensory cortex works? Clinical Neurophysiology, 110(11), 1987-1994.
18. Nishida, S., Sasaki, Y., Murakami, I., Watanabe, T., & Tootell, R. B. (2003). Neuroimaging of direction-selective mechanisms for second-order motion. Journal of Neurophysiology, 90(5), 3242-3254.
19. Nishida, S., & Sato, T. (1995). Motion aftereffect with flickering test patterns reveals higher stages of motion processing. Vision Research, 35(4), 477-490.
20. Purves, D., Paydarfar, J. A., & Andrews, T. J. (1996). The wagon wheel illusion in movies and reality. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 93(8), 3693-3697.
21. Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 372-422.
22. Reddy, L., Rémy, F., Vayssière, N., & VanRullen, R. (2011). Neural correlates of the continuous Wagon Wheel Illusion: A functional MRI study. Human Brain Mapping, 32(2), 163-170. doi: 10. 1002/hbm. 21007.
23. Rees, G., Frith, C. D., & Lavie, N. (1997). Modulating irrelevant motion perception by varying attentional load in an unrelated task. Science, 278(5343), 1616-1619. doi: 10. 1126/science. 278. 5343. 1616.
24. Reichardt, W. (1961). Autocorrelation, a principle for the evaluation of sensory information by the central nervous system. In W. A. Rosenblith (Ed.), Sensory communication (pp. 303-317). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
25. Rojas, D., Carmona-Fontaine, C., López-Calderón, J., & Aboitiz, F. (2006). Do discreteness and rivalry coexist in illusory motion reversals? Vision Research, 46(6-7), 1155-1157.
26. Schouten, J. F. (1967). Subjective stroboscopy and a model of visual movement detectors. In I. Wathen-Dunn (Ed.), Models for the perception of speech and visual form (pp. 44-55). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
27. Seiffert, A. E., Somers, D. C., Dale, A. M., & Tootell, R. B. H. (2003). Functional MRI studies of human visual motion perception: Texture, luminance, attention and after-effects. Cerebral Cortex, 13(4), 340-349. doi: 10. 1093/cercor/13. 4. 340.
28. Simpson, W. A., Shahani, U., & Manahilov, V. (2005). Illusory percepts of moving patterns due to discrete temporal sampling. Neuroscience Letters, 375(1), 23-27.
29. Snowden, R. J., & Hess, R. F. (1992). Temporal frequency filters in the human peripheral visual field. Vision Research, 32(1), 61-72.
30. Vaina, L. M., & Soloviev, S. (2004). First-order and second-order motion: Neurological evidence for neuroanatomically distinct systems. Progress in Brain Research, 144, 197-212. doi: 10. 1016/S0079-6123(03)14414-7.
31. VanRullen, R. (2006). The continuous Wagon Wheel Illusion is object-based. Vision Research, 46(24), 4091-4095. doi: 10. 1016/j. visres. 2006. 07. 030.
32. VanRullen, R. (2007). The continuous Wagon Wheel Illusion depends on, but is not identical to neuronal adaptation. Vision Research, 47(16), 2143-2149. doi: 10. 1016/j. visres. 2007. 03. 019.
33. VanRullen, R., & Koch, C. (2003). Is perception discrete or continuous? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(5), 207-213.
34. VanRullen, R., Pascual-Leone, A., & Battelli, L. (2008). The continuous Wagon wheel illusion and the 'when' pathway of the right parietal lobe: A repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation study. PLoS ONE, 3(8), e2911. doi: 10. 1371/journal. pone. 0002911.
35. VanRullen, R., Reddy, L., & Koch, C. (2005). Attention-driven discrete sampling of motion perception. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(14), 5291-5296. doi: 10. 1073/pnas. 0409172102.
36. VanRullen, R., Reddy, L., & Koch, C. (2006). The continuous wagon wheel illusion is associated with changes in electroencephalogram power at approximately 13 Hz. The Journal of Neuroscience, 26(2), 502-507. doi: 10. 1523/JNEUROSCI. 4654-05. 2006.