The perceived position shift of a pattern that contains internal motion is accompanied by a change in the pattern’s apparent size and shape

Motion-induced distortion of shape

Motion, position, and form are intricately intertwined in perception. Motion distorts visual space, resulting in illusory position shifts such as flash-drag and flash-grab effects. The flash-grab displaces a test by up to several times its size. This lets us use it to investigate where the motion-induced shift operates in the processing stream from photoreceptor activation to feature activation to object recognition. We present several canonical, highly familiar forms and ask whether the motion-induced shift operates uniformly across the form. If it did, we could conclude that the effect occurred after the elements of the form are bound. However, we find that motion-induced distortion affects not only the position, but also the appearance of briefly presented, canonical shapes (square, circle, and letter T). Features of the flashed target that were closest to its center were shifted in the direction of motion more than those further from its center. Outline shapes were affected more than filled shapes, and the strength of the distortion increased with the contrast of the moving background. This not only supports a nonuniform spatial profile for the motion-induced shift but also indicates that the shift operates before the shape is established, even for highly familiar shapes like squares, circles, and letters.

Action can amplify motion-induced illusory displacement

Local motion is known to produce strong illusory displacement in the perceived position of globally static objects. For example, if a dot-cloud or grating drifts to the left within a stationary aperture, the perceived position of the whole aperture will also be shifted to the left. Previously, we used a simple tracking task to demonstrate that active control over the global position of an object did not eliminate this form of illusion. Here, we used a new iPad task to directly compare the magnitude of illusory displacement under active and passive conditions. In the active condition, participants guided a drifting Gabor patch along a virtual slalom course by using the tilt control of an iPad. The task was to position the patch so that it entered each gate at the direct center, and we used the left/right deviations from that point as our dependent measure. In the passive condition, participants watched playback of standardized trajectories along the same course. We systematically varied deviation from midpoint at gate entry, and participants made 2AFC left/right judgments. We fitted cumulative normal functions to individual distributions and extracted the point of subjective equality (PSE) as our dependent measure. To our surprise, the magnitude of displacement was consistently larger under active than under passive conditions. Importantly, control conditions ruled out the possibility that such amplification results from lack of motor control or differences in global trajectories as performance estimates were equivalent in the two conditions in the absence of local motion. Our results suggest that the illusion penetrates multiple levels of the perception-action cycle, indicating that one important direction for the future of perceptual illusions may be to more fully explore their influence during active vision.

Motion streaks do not influence the perceived position of stationary flashed objects

In the present study, we investigated whether motion streaks, produced by fast moving dots Geisler 1999, distort the positional map of stationary flashed objects producing the well-known motion-induced position shift illusion (MIPS). The illusion relies on motion-processing mechanisms that induce local distortions in the positional map of the stimulus which is derived by shape-processing mechanisms. To measure the MIPS, two horizontally offset Gaussian blobs, placed above and below a central fixation point, were flashed over two fields of dots moving in opposite directions. Subjects judged the position of the top Gaussian blob relative to the bottom one. The results showed that neither fast (motion streaks) nor slow moving dots influenced the perceived spatial position of the stationary flashed objects, suggesting that background motion does not interact with the shape-processing mechanisms involved in MIPS.

Crowding is tuned for perceived (not physical) location

In the peripheral visual field, nearby objects can make one another difficult to recognize (crowding) in a manner that critically depends on their separation. We manipulated the apparent separation of objects using the illusory shifts in perceived location that arise from local motion to determine if crowding depends on physical or perceived location. Flickering Gabor targets displayed between either flickering or drifting flankers were used to (a) quantify the perceived target-flanker separation and (b) measure discrimination of the target orientation or spatial frequency as a function of physical target-flanker separation. Relative to performance with flickering targets, we find that flankers drifting away from the target improve discrimination, while those drifting toward the target degrade it. When plotted as a function of perceived separation across conditions, the data collapse onto a single function indicating that it is perceived and not physical location that determines the magnitude of visual crowding. There was no measurable spatial distortion of the target that could explain the effects. This suggests that crowding operates predominantly in extrastriate visual cortex and not in early visual areas where the response of neurons is retinotopically aligned with the physical position of a stimulus.

Perceived positions determine crowding

Crowding is a fundamental bottleneck in object recognition. In crowding, an object in the periphery becomes unrecognizable when surrounded by clutter or distractor objects. Crowding depends on the positions of target and distractors, both their eccentricity and their relative spacing. In all previous studies, position has been expressed in terms of retinal position. However, in a number of situations retinal and perceived positions can be dissociated. Does retinal or perceived position determine the magnitude of crowding? Here observers performed an orientation judgment on a target Gabor patch surrounded by distractors that drifted toward or away from the target, causing an illusory motion-induced position shift. Distractors in identical physical positions led to worse performance when they drifted towards the target (appearing closer) versus away from the target (appearing further). This difference in crowding corresponded to the difference in perceived positions. Further, the perceptual mislocalization was necessary for the change in crowding, and both the mislocalization and crowding scaled with drift speed. The results show that crowding occurs after perceived positions have been assigned by the visual system. Crowding does not operate in a purely retinal coordinate system; perceived positions need to be taken into account.

Illusory position shift induced by plaid motion

In the motion-induced position shift (MIPS), the position of a moving pattern tapered by a stationary envelope is perceived to shift in the direction of the motion. It was found that plaid motion also elicited a MIPS in the direction of global motion and this global MIPS could not be predicted by the average of the local MIPSs due to component motions. We also used a pseudo plaid pattern and again observed a global MIPS that could not be predicted by the local MIPSs due to the components of the pseudo plaid pattern. We suggest the possibility that the receptive-field positions of global motion detectors shift in the direction opposite to global motion, resulting in a positional displacement in activation via population coding.

Position Perception: Influence of Motion With Displacement Dissociated From the Influence of Motion Alone

When humans view a moving object, the spatial lag in perception expected from neural delays may be partially corrected by motion mechanisms biasing perceived position. The drifting-Gabor illusion seems to support this view: the perceived location of a static envelope filled with a moving pattern is shifted in the direction of motion. To test whether this shifting mechanism also extrapolates the position of moving displacing objects, we compared the perceptual position shift for drifting versus displacing Gabors when the motion is toward the fovea and when the motion is away from the fovea. For displacing Gabors, the shift was much greater for motion toward the fovea, whereas for drifting Gabors, the shift was greater for motion away from the fovea. This dissociation suggests that the illusions are caused by different mechanisms.

Distortions of perceived auditory and visual space following adaptation to motion

Adaptation to visual motion can induce marked distortions of the perceived spatial location of subsequently viewed stationary objects. These positional shifts are direction specific and exhibit tuning for the speed of the adapting stimulus. In this study, we sought to establish whether comparable motion-induced distortions of space can be induced in the auditory domain. Using individually measured head related transfer functions (HRTFs) we created auditory stimuli that moved either leftward or rightward in the horizontal plane. Participants adapted to unidirectional auditory motion presented at a range of speeds and then judged the spatial location of a brief stationary test stimulus. All participants displayed direction-dependent and speed-tuned shifts in perceived auditory position relative to a 'no adaptation' baseline measure. To permit direct comparison between effects in different sensory domains, measurements of visual motion-induced distortions of perceived position were also made using stimuli equated in positional sensitivity for each participant. Both the overall magnitude of the observed positional shifts, and the nature of their tuning with respect to adaptor speed were similar in each case. A third experiment was carried out where participants adapted to visual motion prior to making auditory position judgements. Similar to the previous experiments, shifts in the direction opposite to that of the adapting motion were observed. These results add to a growing body of evidence suggesting that the neural mechanisms that encode visual and auditory motion are more similar than previously thought.

Local motion inside an object affects pointing less than smooth pursuit

During smooth pursuit eye movements, briefly presented objects are mislocalized in the direction of motion. It has been proposed that the localization error is the sum of the pursuit signal and the retinal motion signal in a ~200 ms interval after flash onset. To evaluate contributions of retinal motion signals produced by the entire object (global motion) and elements within the object (local motion), we asked observers to reach to flashed Gabor patches (Gaussian-windowed sine-wave gratings). Global motion was manipulated by varying the duration of a stationary flash, and local motion was manipulated by varying the motion of the sine-wave. Our results confirm that global retinal motion reduces the localization error. The effect of local retinal motion on object localization was far smaller, even though local and global motion had equal effects on eye velocity. Thus, local retinal motion has differential access to manual and oculomotor control circuits. Further, we observed moderate correlations between smooth pursuit gain and localization error.

Motion and position coding

Motion contained within a static object can cause illusory position shifts toward the direction of internal motion. Here we present data suggesting this illusion is driven by modulations of apparent contrast. We observe position shifts at blurred stimulus regions without corresponding changes to internal structure, and find that low-contrast targets are more difficult to detect at the trailing, as opposed to leading, edges of movement. Motion induced position shifts are also shown to occur without conscious appreciation of motion direction. Our data suggests that motion can influence spatial coding via interactions that modulate apparent contrast, thereby changing the regions of the stimulus that are visible.