Abstract
The apparent velocity of an objectively rotating visually textured disk is an increasing monotonic function of the coarseness (size) of visual texture. The apparent velocity of a negative motion aftereffect increases with coarseness of moving induction texture but decreases with coarseness of stationary test texture, and there is an interaction between induction and test textures. An explanation of these effects is based principally on the assumption of greater lateral inhibition between neighboring elements in finer textures.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Reference Note
Keck, M. J., Pallela, T. D., Carroll. J., & Pantle. A.Motion aftereffect as a function of the contrast of sinusoidal gratings. Paper presented to the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Sarasota, Florida, May 1973.
References
Békésy, G. Von.Sensory inhibition. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press, 1967.
Brown, J. F The visual perception of velocity.Psychologische Forschung, 1931,14, 199–232.
Cann, M. A.The negative after-effect of motion as a function of test stimulus texture. (Doctoral dissertation, Boston University.) Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms. 1961, No. 61-2414.
Dixon, N. F., &Meisels, L. The effect of information content upon the perception and alter-effects of a rotating field.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1966,18, 310–318.
Gibson, J. J. Research on visual perception of motion and change. Second Symposium on Physiological Psychology, School of Aviation Medicine, Pensacola, Florida, 1958. In I. M. Spigel (Ed.).Readings in the study of visually perceived movement. New York: Harper & Row, 1965. Pp. 125–146.
Holland, H. C. The spiral after-effect. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1965. Hubel, D. H., & Wiesel, T. N. Receptive fields. binocular interaction, and functional architecture in the cat’s visual cortex.Journal of Physiology, 1902,160, 106–154.
Kolers, P. A. Some differences between real and apparent visual movement.Vision Research, 1963,3, 191–206.
Mayhew, J. E. W., &Anstis, S. M. Movement aftereffects contingent un color, intensity, and pattern.Perception & Psychophysics, 1972,12, 77–85.
McCollough, C. Color adaptation of edge-detectors in the human visual system.Science, 1965,149, 1115–1116.
Over, R., Broersf, J., Crassini, B., &Lovegrove, W. Spatial determinants of the aftereffect of seen motion.Vision Research, 1973,13, 1681–1690.
Oyama, T. The visually perceived velocity as a function of aperture size, stripe size, luminance, and motion direction.Japanese Psychological Research, 1970,12, 163–171.
Scott, T. R, Jordan, A. E., &Powell, D. A. Does visual aftereffect of motion add algebraically to objective motion of the test stimulus?Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1963,66, 500–505.
Sekuifr, R., &Pantle, A. A model for after-effects of seen movement.Vision Research, 1967,7, 427–439.
Smith, O. W., &Sherlock, C A. A new explanation of the velocity transposition phenomenon.American Journal Psychology, 1957,70, 102–105.
Spigel, I. M. (Ed.)Readings in the study of visually perceived movement New York Harper & Row, 1965.
Spitz, H H Neural satiation in the spiral aftereffect and similar movement aftereffectsPerceptual and Motor Skills, 1958,8, 207–213
Walker, J. T A texture-contingent visual motion aftereffect.Psychonomic Science, 1972,28, 333–335.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported in part by National Institute of Mental Health Grant USPH 1 R03 MH 18809-01. A version of this paper was presented to the Eastern Psychological Association, Washington, D.C., May 3, 1973.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Walker, J.T. Visual texture as a factor in the apparent velocity of objective motion and motion aftereffects. Perception & Psychophysics 18, 175–180 (1975). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03204107
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03204107