Classical apparent motion stimuli exhibit an inherent ambiguity with respect to the onsets and offsets of the stimulus elements. Sigman and Rock (1974, Perception3 9 – 28) presented evidence suggesting that occlusion cues are used to resolve this ambiguity. We present results from experiments designed to further test predictions of this hypothesis. As expected, we found that the apparent motion of a target stimulus is suppressed when a ‘moving’ occluder is positioned such that it rationalises the onsets and offsets of the stimulus elements constituting the target. Somewhat unexpectedly, though, we also observed a slight tendency for motion suppression under conditions where the target was only partially occluded. The expected motion suppression occurred both with solid occluders and purely virtual Kanizsa-like occluders, although it was not always observed in the latter case. Motion suppression was found to occur over a wide range of stimulus onset asynchronies. Finally, we used binocular disparity cues to test the occlusion account of the motion suppression phenomenon against an alternative explanation in terms of attentional factors. The results are in clear favour of the occlusion account.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllportD A, 1968“Phenomenal simultaneity and the perceptual moment hypothesis”British Journal of Psychology59395–406
2.
AndersonB LSinhaP, 1997“Reciprocal interactions between occlusion and motion computations”Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA943477–3480
3.
AnstisS M, 1970“Phi movement as a subtraction process”Vision Research101411–1430
4.
AnstisS M, 1980“The perception of apparent movement”Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B290153–168
5.
AnstisS M, 1990“Imperceptible intersections: The chopstick illusion”, in AI and the Eye: Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Visual Perception Eds BlakeATrosciankoT, (Chichester: John Wiley & Sons) pp 105–117
6.
Anton-ErxlebenKHenrichCTreueS, 2007“Attention changes perceived size of moving visual patterns”Journal of Vision7(11) 5, 1–9, doi:10.1167/7.11.5
7.
BalochA AGrossbergS, 1997“A neural model of high-level motion processing: Line motion and formotion dynamics”Vision Research373037–3059
8.
BattelliLCavanaghPIntriligatorJTramoM JHénaffM AMichelFBartonJ J, 2001“Unilateral right-parietal damage leads to bilateral deficit for high-level motion”Neuron32985–995
9.
BoringE G, 1950Sensation and Perception in the History of Experimental Psychology (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts)
10.
BraddickO J, 1974“A short-range process in apparent motion”Vision Research14519–527
11.
CavanaghPMatherG, 1989“Motion: The long and short of it”Spatial Vision4103–129
12.
DowningP ETreismanA M, 1997“The line-motion illusion: Attention or impletion?”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance23768–779
13.
DuncanR OAlbrightT DStonerG R, 2000“Occlusion and the interpretation of visual motion: Perceptual and neuronal effects of context”Journal of Neuroscience205885–5897
14.
EhrensteinW, 2003“Basics of seeing motion”Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia6644–52
15.
EkrollVFaulFGolzJ, 2008“Classification of apparent motion percepts based on temporal factors”Journal of Vision8(4) 31, 1–22, doi:10.1167/8.4.31
16.
ExnerS, 1875“Experimentelle Untersuchung der einfachsten psychischen Processe: III. Abhandlung, Der persönlichen Gleichung zweiter Teil”Archiv für die gesamte Physiologie des Menschen und der Thiere11403 – 432, 581–602
17.
GrossbergS, 1998“How is a moving target continuously tracked behind occluding cover”, in High-level Motion Processing—Computational, Neurobiological and Psychophysical Perspectives Ed. WatanabeT, (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press) pp 1–30
18.
von GrünauMFaubertJ, “Inter- and intra-attribute effects in motion induction”Perception23913–928
19.
HikosakaOMiyauchiSShimojoS, 1993a“Focal visual attention produces illusory temporal order and motion sensation”Vision Research331219–1240
20.
HikosakaOMiyauchiSShimojoS, 1993b“Voluntary and stimulus-induced attention detected as motion sensation”Perception22517–526
21.
HockH SNicholsD F, 2004“Separating the edge-based detection of object motion from the objectless detection of motion energy”Perception33Supplement, 35b (abstract)
22.
HolcombeA O, 2003“Occlusion cues resolve sudden onsets into morphing or line motion, disocclusion, and sudden materialization”Journal of Vision3(8) 4, 562–572, doi:10.1167/3.8.4
23.
HorowitzTTreismanA, 1994“Attention and apparent motion”Spatial Vision8193–219
24.
KanizsaG, 1951“Sulla polarizzazione del movimento gamma” [On the polarization of gamma motion]Archivio di Psicologia, Neurologia e Psichiatria3224–267
25.
KanizsaG, 1979Organization in Vision (New York: Praeger Scientific)
26.
KolersP A, 1972Aspects of Motion Perception (Oxford: Pergamon Press)
27.
KolersP AGreenM, 1984“Color logic of apparent motion”Perception13249–254
28.
KolersP APomerantzJ R, 1971“Figural change in apparent motion”Journal of Experimental Psychology8799–108
29.
LidenLMingollaE, 1998“Monocular occlusion cues alter the influence of terminator motion in the barber pole phenomenon”Vision Research383883–3898
30.
McDermottJAdelsonE H, 2004“The geometry of the occluding contour and its effect on motion interpretation”Journal of Vision4(10) 9, 944 – 954, doi:10.1167/4.10.9
31.
MackARockI, 1998Inattentional Blindness (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press)
32.
MirabellaGNorciaA M, 2008“Neural correlates of transformational apparent motion”Perception371368–1379
33.
NavonD, 1976“Irrelevance of figural identity for resolving ambiguities in apparent motion”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Perception2130–138
34.
NeuhausW, 1930“Experimentelle Untersuchung der Scheinbewegung”Archiv für die gesamte Psychologie75315–458
35.
O'NeilW MLandauerA A, 1966“The phi-phenomenon: Turning point or rallying point”Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences2335–340
36.
PetersikJ TMcDillM, 1981“A new bistable motion illusion based upon kinetic ‘optical occlusion’”Perception10563–572
37.
RamachandranV SInadaVKiamaG, 1986“Perception of illusory occlusion in apparent motion”Vision Research261741–1749
38.
ReichardtW E, 1957“Autokorrelations-Auswertung als Funktionsprinzip des Zentralnervensystems (bei der optischen Wahrnehmung eines Insektes)”Zeitschrift für Naturforschung B12448–457
39.
van SantenJ PSperlingG, 1984“Temporal covariance model of human model perception”Journal of the Optical Society of America A1451–473
40.
SaucerR T, 1953“The nature of perceptual processes”Science117556–558
41.
SaucerR T, 1954“Processes of motion perception”Science120806–807
42.
ScherzerT REkrollV, 2009“Intermittent occlusion enhances the smoothness of sampled motion”Journal of Vision9(10) 16, 1 – 18, doi:10.1167/9.10.16
43.
ShimojoSNakayamaK, 1990“Amodal representation of occluded surfaces: Role of invisible stimuli in apparent motion correspondence”Perception19285–299
44.
ShimojoSSilvermanG HNakayamaK, 1989“Occlusion and the solution to the aperture problem for motion”Vision Research29619–626
45.
SigmanERockI, 1974“Stroboscopic movement based on perceptual intelligence”Perception39–28
46.
SquiresP C, 1931“The influence of hue on apparent visual movement”American Journal of Psychology4349–64
47.
SteinmanR MPizloZPizloF P, 2000“Phi is not beta, and why Wertheimer's discovery launched the Gestalt revolution”Vision Research402257–2264
48.
TsePCavanaghPNakayamaK, 1998“The role of parsing in high-level motion processing”, in High-level Motion Processing—Computational, Neurobiological and Psychophysical Perspectives Ed. WatanabeT, (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press) pp 249–266
49.
TylerC M, 1973“Temporal characteristics in apparent movement: Omega movement vs. phi movement”Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology25182–193
50.
UllmanS, 1979The Interpretation of Visual Motion (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press)
51.
VallortigaraGBressanP, 1991“Occlusion and the perception of coherent motion”Vision Research311967–1978
