Unbiased measures of interocular transfer of motion adaptation

Perception. 2015;44(5):541-55. doi: 10.1068/p7819.

Abstract

Numerous studies have measured the extent to which motion aftereffects transfer interocularly. However, many have done so using bias-prone methods, and studies rarely compare different types of motion directly. Here, we use a technique designed to reduce bias (Morgan, 2013, Journal of Vision, 13(8):26, 1-11) to estimate interocular transfer (IOT) for five types of motion: simple translational motion, expansion/contraction, rotation, spiral, and complex translational motion. We used both static and dynamic targets with subjects making binary judgments of perceived speed. Overall, the average IOT was 65%, consistent with previous studies (mean over 17 studies of 67% transfer). There was a main effect of motion type, with translational motion producing stronger IOT (mean: 86%) overall than any of the more complex varieties of motion (mean: 51%). This is inconsistent with the notion that IOT should be strongest for motion processed in extrastriate regions that are fully binocular. We conclude that adaptation is a complex phenomenon too poorly understood to make firm inferences about the binocular structure of motion systems.

MeSH terms

  • Adaptation, Physiological
  • Afterimage
  • Humans
  • Motion Perception*
  • Motion Pictures
  • Research Design
  • Sensory Thresholds
  • Vision, Binocular*
  • Visual Perception*