Arnold Derek H, Pearce Samuel L, Marinovic Welber
School of Psychology.
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2014 Jun;40(3):938-47. doi: 10.1037/a0035362. Epub 2014 Mar 17.
Illusory motion reversals (IMRs) can happen when looking at a repetitive pattern of motion, such as a spinning wheel. To date these have been attributed to either a form of motion aftereffect seen while viewing a moving stimulus or to the visual system taking discrete perceptual snapshots of continuous input. Here we present evidence that we argue is inconsistent with both proposals. First, we show that IMRs are driven by the adaptation of nondirectional temporal frequency tuned cells, which is inconsistent with the motion aftereffect account. Then we establish that the optimal frequency for inducing IMRs differs for color and luminance defined movement. These data are problematic for any account based on a constant rate of discrete perceptual sampling. Instead, we suggest IMRs result from a perceptual rivalry involving discrepant signals from a feature tracking analysis of movement and motion-energy based analyses. We do not assume that feature tracking relies on a discrete sampling of input at a fixed rate, but rather that feature tracking can (mis)match features at any rate less than a stimulus driven maximal resolution. Consistent with this proposal, we show that the critical frequency for inducing IMRs is dictated by the duty cycle of salient features within a moving pattern, rather than by the temporal frequency of luminance changes.
当观察重复的运动模式，如旋转的轮子时，可能会出现虚幻运动反转（IMR）。迄今为止，这些现象要么归因于在观看移动刺激时出现的一种运动后效形式，要么归因于视觉系统对连续输入进行离散的感知快照。在这里，我们提出的证据与这两种观点都不一致。首先，我们表明IMR是由非定向时间频率调谐细胞的适应驱动的，这与运动后效的解释不一致。然后我们确定，诱导IMR的最佳频率对于颜色和亮度定义的运动是不同的。这些数据对于任何基于离散感知采样恒定速率的解释来说都是有问题的。相反，我们认为IMR是由一种感知竞争导致的，这种竞争涉及来自运动的特征跟踪分析和基于运动能量分析的不一致信号。我们并不假设特征跟踪依赖于以固定速率对输入进行离散采样，而是认为特征跟踪可以以任何低于刺激驱动的最大分辨率的速率（错误地）匹配特征。与这一观点一致，我们表明诱导IMR的临界频率由运动模式中显著特征的占空比决定，而不是由亮度变化的时间频率决定。
