Pre-exposure to moving form enhances static form sensitivity.

BACKGROUND: Motion-defined form can seem to persist briefly after motion ceases, before seeming to gradually disappear into the background. Here we investigate if this subjective persistence reflects a signal capable of improving objective measures of sensitivity to static form. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPA...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Thomas S A Wallis, Mark A Williams, Derek H Arnold
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2009-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC2789944?pdf=render
id doaj-0650b44facb143a79988d7bfd13ba88b
record_format Article
spelling doaj-0650b44facb143a79988d7bfd13ba88b2020-11-24T21:49:06ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032009-01-01412e832410.1371/journal.pone.0008324Pre-exposure to moving form enhances static form sensitivity.Thomas S A WallisMark A WilliamsDerek H ArnoldBACKGROUND: Motion-defined form can seem to persist briefly after motion ceases, before seeming to gradually disappear into the background. Here we investigate if this subjective persistence reflects a signal capable of improving objective measures of sensitivity to static form. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We presented a sinusoidal modulation of luminance, masked by a background noise pattern. The sinusoidal luminance modulation was usually subjectively invisible when static, but visible when moving. We found that drifting then stopping the waveform resulted in a transient subjective persistence of the waveform in the static display. Observers' objective sensitivity to the position of the static waveform was also improved after viewing moving waveforms, compared to viewing static waveforms for a matched duration. This facilitation did not occur simply because movement provided more perspectives of the waveform, since performance following pre-exposure to scrambled animations did not match that following pre-exposure to smooth motion. Observers did not simply remember waveform positions at motion offset, since removing the waveform before testing reduced performance. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Motion processing therefore interacts with subsequent static visual inputs in a way that can improve performance in objective sensitivity measures. We suggest that the brief subjective persistence of motion-defined forms that can occur after motion offsets is a consequence of the decay of a static form signal that has been transiently enhanced by motion processing.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC2789944?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Thomas S A Wallis
Mark A Williams
Derek H Arnold
spellingShingle Thomas S A Wallis
Mark A Williams
Derek H Arnold
Pre-exposure to moving form enhances static form sensitivity.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Thomas S A Wallis
Mark A Williams
Derek H Arnold
author_sort Thomas S A Wallis
title Pre-exposure to moving form enhances static form sensitivity.
title_short Pre-exposure to moving form enhances static form sensitivity.
title_full Pre-exposure to moving form enhances static form sensitivity.
title_fullStr Pre-exposure to moving form enhances static form sensitivity.
title_full_unstemmed Pre-exposure to moving form enhances static form sensitivity.
title_sort pre-exposure to moving form enhances static form sensitivity.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2009-01-01
description BACKGROUND: Motion-defined form can seem to persist briefly after motion ceases, before seeming to gradually disappear into the background. Here we investigate if this subjective persistence reflects a signal capable of improving objective measures of sensitivity to static form. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We presented a sinusoidal modulation of luminance, masked by a background noise pattern. The sinusoidal luminance modulation was usually subjectively invisible when static, but visible when moving. We found that drifting then stopping the waveform resulted in a transient subjective persistence of the waveform in the static display. Observers' objective sensitivity to the position of the static waveform was also improved after viewing moving waveforms, compared to viewing static waveforms for a matched duration. This facilitation did not occur simply because movement provided more perspectives of the waveform, since performance following pre-exposure to scrambled animations did not match that following pre-exposure to smooth motion. Observers did not simply remember waveform positions at motion offset, since removing the waveform before testing reduced performance. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Motion processing therefore interacts with subsequent static visual inputs in a way that can improve performance in objective sensitivity measures. We suggest that the brief subjective persistence of motion-defined forms that can occur after motion offsets is a consequence of the decay of a static form signal that has been transiently enhanced by motion processing.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC2789944?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT thomassawallis preexposuretomovingformenhancesstaticformsensitivity
AT markawilliams preexposuretomovingformenhancesstaticformsensitivity
AT derekharnold preexposuretomovingformenhancesstaticformsensitivity
_version_ 1725889575932395520