Adding rotation to translation: percepts and illusions

This study investigated how the perception of a translating object is affected by rotation. Observers were asked to judge the motion and trajectory of objects that rotated around their centroid while linearly translating. The expected percept, consistent with the actual dynamics used to generate the movie sequences, is that of a translating and rotating object, akin to a tumbling rugby ball. Observers, however, do not always report this and, under certain circumstances, perceive the object to translate on an illusory curved trajectory, similar to a car driving on a curved road. The prevalence of veridical versus nonveridical percepts depends on a number of factors. First, if the object's orientation remains within a limited range relative to the axis of translation, the illusory, curved percept dominates. If the orientation, at any point of the movie sequence, differs sufficiently from the axis of translation, the percept switches to linear translation with rotation. The angle at which the switch occurs is dependent upon a number of factors that relate to an object's elongation and, with it, the prominence of its orientation. For an ellipse with an aspect ratio of 3, the switch occurs at approximately 45°. Higher aspect ratios increase the range; lower ratios decrease it. This applies similarly to rectangular shapes. A line is more likely to be perceived on a curved trajectory than an elongated rectangle, which, in turn, is more likely seen on a curved path than a square. This is largely independent of rotational and translational speeds. Measuring perceived directions of motion at different instants in time allows the shape of the perceived illusory curved path to be extrapolated. This results in a trajectory that is independent of object size and corresponds closely to the actual object orientation at different points during the movie sequence. The results provide evidence for a perceptual transition from an illusory curved trajectory to a veridical linear trajectory (with rotation) for the same object. Both are consistent with special real-world cases such as objects rotating around a centre outside of the object so that their orientation remains tangent to the trajectory (cheetahs running along a curve, sailboats) or objects tumbling along simple trajectories (a monkey spinning in air, spinning cars on ice). In certain cases, the former is an illusion. </jats:p

Anisotropy in judging the absolute direction of motion

AbstractThe angular dependence of precision measurements is well established as the oblique effect in motion perception. Recently, it has been shown that the visual system also exhibits anisotropic behaviour with respect to accuracy of the absolute direction of motion of random dot fields. This study aimed to investigate whether this angular dependent, directional bias is a general phenomenon of motion perception. Our results demonstrate, for single translating tilted lines viewed foveally, an extraordinary illusion with perceptual deviations of up to 35° from veridical. Not only is the magnitude of these deviations substantially larger than that for random dots, but the general pattern of the illusion is also different from that found for dot fields. Significant differences in the bias, as a function of line tilt and line length, suggest that the illusion does not result from fixed inaccuracies of the visual system in the computation of direction of motion. Potential sources for these large biases are motion integration mechanisms. These were also found to be anisotropic. The anisotropic nature and the surprisingly large magnitude of the effect make it a necessary consideration in analyses of motion experiments and in modelling studies

Global shape versus local feature: an angle illusion

AbstractWe have shown previously that the precision of angle judgments depends strongly on the global stimulus configuration: discrimination thresholds for angles that form part of isosceles triangles are up to 3 times lower than for those that form part of scalene triangles [Kennedy, G. J., Orbach, H. S., & Loffler, G. (2006). Effects of global shape on angle discrimination. Vision Research, 46(8–9), 1530–1539]. Here, we investigated whether or not the perceived size of an angle (accuracy) is also affected by the overall shape of which it forms a part. Observers compared the relative sizes of angles contained in isosceles triangles with those of angles in scalene triangles and points of subjective equality were determined. For a reference angle of 60°, angles embedded in isosceles triangles were judged to be on average 14° larger than angles embedded in scalene triangles. This result is largely independent of the reference angle, triangle orientation and triangle size. Moreover, the effect is present whether or not triangles of different shapes enclose the same area, whether or not the side of the triangle opposite the angle is present and whether the triangle is outlined or defined by dots at its vertexes. In sum, our results provide evidence for a novel illusion where an angle embedded in an isosceles triangle is judged substantially larger than the same angle embedded in a scalene triangle. This finding demonstrates that mechanisms for computing angles are sensitive to the context within which angles are presented

Effects of global shape on angle discrimination

AbstractPrevious studies have been inconclusive as to whether angle discrimination performance can be predicted by the sensitivity of orientation discrimination mechanisms or by that of mechanisms specialised for angle coding. However, these studies have assumed that angle discrimination is independent of the shape of the object of which the angle is a part. This assumption was tested by measuring angle discrimination using angles that were parts of different triangular shapes. Angle discrimination thresholds were lowest when angles were presented in isosceles triangles (sides forming the angle were of identical length). Performance was significantly poorer when angles were presented in scalene triangles (sides of different lengths) and as much as three times worse when the sides forming the angle varied randomly in length between presentations. Comparing orientation discrimination for single lines with angle discrimination for different stimulus conditions (isosceles, scalene and random triangles) leads to conflicting conclusions as to the mechanisms underlying angle perception: line orientation sensitivity correctly predicts angle discrimination for random triangles, but underestimates angle acuity for isosceles triangles. The fact that performance in angle discrimination tasks is strongly dependant on the overall stimulus geometry implies that geometric angles are computed by mechanisms that are sensitive to global aspects of the stimulus