Cyclopean tilt aftereffects can be induced monocularly: is there a purely binocular process?

The different mechanisms of the motion direction illusion and aftereffect

Direction repulsion is the illusory expansion of the angle between two directions of motion, and may occur when the two directions are presented simultaneously (an illusion) or successively (an aftereffect). Here we demonstrate that the motion direction illusion (DI) and aftereffect (DAE) have different mechanisms. Two experiments show that when the two interacting stimuli are presented to different eyes, the DI is greatly reduced but the DAE is obtained at near to full strength. These results suggest that different populations of cells within the visual pathway produce the DI and DAE.

Large repulsion, but not attraction, tilt illusions occur when stimulus parameters selectively favour either transient (M-like) or sustained (P-like) mechanisms

A vertical test grating appears tilted away from a surrounding inducing grating which is 15 degrees from vertical (repulsion effect) but towards an inducer 75 degrees from vertical (attraction effect). This is the tilt illusion (TI) and similar effects occur when inducing and test stimuli are presented successively (tilt after-effect or TAE). When it was reported [Wolfe, J. (1984). Vision Research, 24, 1959-1964] that large repulsion TAEs occurred with short test flashes, Wolfe postulated that either there are distinct mechanisms which process brief and longer duration stimuli; or that there are distinct mechanisms which are not primarily concerned with duration but are differentially responsive to temporal parameters, amongst several others. Other evidence that TI attraction effects are not modulated by test flash duration resulted in an hypothesis that repulsion and attraction effects are mediated by transient and sustained mechanisms, respectively [Wenderoth, P., van der Zwan, R., & Johnstone, S. (1989). Perception, 18, 715-728]. We demonstrate that large repulsion TIs can be induced when parameters other than duration are manipulated, including contrast and spatial frequency but that these parameters fail to modulate attraction TIs. These results are consistent with some previous hypotheses regarding the origin of repulsion and attraction effects and with Wolfe's latter hypothesis but do not support the view that the two effects are processed, respectively, by transient and sustained mechanisms.

A role for a low level mechanism in determining plaid coherence

A number of recent studies have suggested that the "intersection of constraints" model of two dimensional motion perception, put forward by Adelson and Movshon [(1982) Nature, 300, 523-525], is incomplete. Evidence has been mounting that there is a second two-dimensional motion sensitive mechanism which is monocular and which appears to respond directly to the movement of the intersections (or "blobs") in a two-dimensional image. The current study extends these findings by demonstrating that the perceived coherence of a drifting plaid is largely under the control of a monocular mechanism. Prior exposure to a similarly drifting grating or plaid substantially raises the coherence threshold of a test plaid only if the same eye is adapted and tested. The threshold elevation is much more modest if the test plaid is presented to the unadapted eye, suggesting that coherence judgements are primarily based on the activity level of a monocular process--possibly the "blob tracking mechanism". The results of Expt 2 suggest the possibility that this monocular mechanism is inhibited by binocular exposure.

The contribution of one-dimensional motion mechanisms to the perceived direction of drifting plaids and their after effects

When motion aftereffects (MAEs) are measured by adapting to a drifting plaid (simultaneous adaptation) or by adapting to the plaid's component gratings in alternation (alternating adaptation), it has been shown that the velocity and duration of the MAE are smaller in the latter case [Wenderoth, P., Bray, R. & Johnstone, S. (1988) Perception, 17, 81-91; Burke, D. & Wenderoth, P. (1993) Vision Research, 33, 351-359]. However, Burke and Wenderoth additionally reported that the directions of MAEs induced by simultaneous and alternating adaptation were identical, an apparent inconsistency if the differences in duration and velocity were due to the presence of "blobs" at the component grating intersects in the simultaneous case. Presumably, the direction of the "blobs" should also affect perceived plaid direction during adaptation and, hence, the MAE direction. In five experiments, we have measured both perceived adapting plaid and MAE direction, tested with both alternating and simultaneous adaptation, measured interocular transfer of plaid-induced MAEs and obtained MAE and plaid direction judgments under monocular and binocular viewing conditions. All of the data indicate that there is a blob tracking mechanism which is preferentially stimulated by plaids whose component gratings have high spatial frequency, low temporal frequency and high contrast. Differences between simultaneous and alternating adaptation emerge only when more optimal blobs are used, thus accounting for Burke and Wenderoth's failure to find a difference. The data also support Burke and Wenderoth's claim that the blob tracking mechanism is monocular: alternating and simultaneous adaptation produce identical MAEs under interocular transfer conditions, even using plaids with more optimal blobs. We also report the unexpected finding that plaids with more- and less-optimal blobs appear to drift in directions 20 degrees apart yet their aftereffects differ in direction by only 3-5 degrees. That is, more optimal blob plaids--compared with less optimal blob plaids--change both perceived plaid direction during adaptation and subsequent perceived MAE direction but the latter change is much more modest. Possible explanations of this dissociation are considered.

Determinants of two-dimensional motion aftereffects induced by simultaneously- and alternately-presented plaid components

Wenderoth, Bray and Johnstone [(1988) Perception, 17, 81-91] measured motion aftereffects induced on stationary vertical sine-wave gratings by horizontally drifting two-dimensional patterns (plaids). The adapting plaid component gratings were simultaneously or alternately presented and were oriented left and right of vertical by 15, 45 or 75 degrees. It was found that aftereffects decreased linearly in the alternating conditions as the plaid component orientations changed but this was not the case in the simultaneous adaptation conditions, a finding taken to be consistent with the hypothesis that one-dimensional aftereffects have a low level site (possibly V1) whereas two-dimensional effects have a higher level site (possibly MT). In three experiments, we have examined in more detail the determinants of aftereffects induced by simultaneous and alternating plaid components. The data suggest that the mechanisms involved are more complex than those put forward by Wenderoth et al. and that plaid perception utilizes both higher and lower level processes which can be referred to, respectively, as an intersection of constraints algorithm and a moving "blob" detector.

Local and global mechanisms of one- and two-dimensional orientation illusions

One-dimensional (1-D) orientation illusions induced on a test grating by a tilted and surrounding 1-D inducing grating have a well-known angular function that exhibits both repulsion and attraction effects. Two-dimensional (2-D) orientation illusions are those induced on a test grating by 2-D image modulation, such as a pair of superimposed inducing gratings at different orientations, usually orthogonal (a plaid). Given the known angular functions induced by the plaid component gratings, two hypotheses were developed that predicted different plaid-induced illusion functions. Hypothesis 1 states that the 1-D component-induced effects simply add linearly; Hypothesis 2 states that there is an additional mechanism that responds to the virtual axes of mirror symmetry of the plaid and adds to the effect. The data of two experiments were consistent with the predictions from the second hypothesis but not the first. Possible neural substrates of mechanisms that extract axes of symmetry are discussed; it is suggested that such global symmetry axes may underlie the perceived orientation of complex shapes.