The aim of the two present experiments was to examine the ontogenetic development of the dissociation between perception and action in children using the Duncker illusion. In this illusion, a moving background alters the perceived direction of target motion. Targets were held stationary while appearing to move in an induced displacement. In Experiment 1, 30 children aged 7, 9, and 12 years and 10 adults made a perceptual judgment or pointed as accurately as possible, with their index finger, to the last position of the target. The 7-year-old children were more perceptually deceived than the others by the Duncker illusion but there were no differences for the goal-directed pointing movements. In Experiment 2, 50 children aged 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 years made a perceptual judgment or reproduced as accurately as possible, with a handle, the distance traveled by the target. Participants were perceptually deceived by the illusion, judging the target as moving although it was stationary. When reproducing the distance covered by the target, children were unaffected by the Duncker illusion. Our results suggest that the separation of the allocentric visual perception pathway from the egocentric action pathway occurs before 7 years of age.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2003.10.003 | DOI Listing |
Front Sports Act Living
January 2020
Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
The aim of the current study was to investigate whether a moving advertisement positioned behind the goal area would influence the visual attention of participants performing a soccer penalty kick, and, whether this would an effect on subsequent motor performance. It was hypothesized that if the (moving) advertisement would function as a distractor, then this would result in non-specific disruptions in penalty performance measures, especially affecting aiming location and precision. Alternatively, it was reasoned that, in line with the Dunker illusion, the moving advertisement would systematically affect perception of target location, resulting in changes in penalty performance and aiming that are specific for the direction of motion of the advertisement.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFPerception
December 2012
Department of Psychology, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia.
Duncker (1929/1955, Source Book of Gestalt Psychology, pp 161-172) demonstrated a laboratory version of induced motion. He showed that, when a stationary spot of light in a dark laboratory is enclosed in an oscillating rectangular frame, the frame is perceived as stationary and the dot appears to move in the direction opposite the true motion of the frame. Zivotofsky (2004, Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science 45 2867-2872) studied a more complex variant of the Duncker illusion, in which both the inducing and the test stimuli moved: a single red test dot moved horizontally left or right while a dense background set of black dots on a white background moved vertically up or down.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFAtten Percept Psychophys
May 2011
Center for Adaptive Systems, Department of Cognitive and Neural Systems, and Center of Excellence for Learning in Education, Science, and Technology, Boston University, 677 Beacon Street, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
How do spatially disjoint and ambiguous local motion signals in multiple directions generate coherent and unambiguous representations of object motion? Various motion percepts, starting with those of Duncker (Induced motion, 1929/1938) and Johansson (Configurations in event perception, 1950), obey a rule of vector decomposition, in which global motion appears to be subtracted from the true motion path of localized stimulus components, so that objects and their parts are seen as moving relative to a common reference frame. A neural model predicts how vector decomposition results from multiple-scale and multiple-depth interactions within and between the form- and motion-processing streams in V1-V2 and V1-MST, which include form grouping, form-to-motion capture, figure-ground separation, and object motion capture mechanisms. Particular advantages of the model are that these mechanisms solve the aperture problem, group spatially disjoint moving objects via illusory contours, capture object motion direction signals on real and illusory contours, and use interdepth directional inhibition to cause a vector decomposition, whereby the motion directions of a moving frame at a nearer depth suppress those directions at a farther depth, and thereby cause a peak shift in the perceived directions of object parts moving with respect to the frame.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Cogn Neurosci
July 2005
National Eye Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA.
The visual system uses the pattern of motion on the retina to analyze the motion of objects in the world, and the motion of the observer him/herself. Distinguishing between retinal motion evoked by movement of the retina in space and retinal motion evoked by movement of objects in the environment is computationally difficult, and the human visual system frequently misinterprets the meaning of retinal motion. In this study, we demonstrate that the visual system of the Rhesus monkey also misinterprets retinal motion.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFNeurosci Lett
March 2005
The Gonda Multidisciplinary Brain Research Center, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan 52900, Israel.
The visual system serves two distinct functions. The information acquired by it is used to both create a percept of the external world and to guide motor actions. In recent years there has been considerable debate regarding whether the same information is utilized and processed in the same manner in the two tasks.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!