The Role of Motion Streaks in the Perception of the Kinetic Zollner Illusion
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Journal of Vision (2012) 12(6):19, 1–14 http://www.journalofvision.org/content/12/6/19 1 The role of motion streaks in the perception of the kinetic Zollner illusion The School of Optometry and Vision Science, The University of New South Wales, Sieu K. Khuu Sydney, New South Wales $ In classic geometric illusions such as the Zollner illusion, vertical lines superimposed on oriented background lines appear tilted in the direction opposite to the background. In kinetic forms of this illusion, an object moving over oriented background lines appears to follow a titled path, again in the direction opposite to the background. Existing literature does not proffer a complete explanation of the effect. Here, it is suggested that motion streaks underpin the illusion; that the effect is a consequence of interactions between detectors tuned to the orientation of background lines and those sensing the motion streaks that arise from fast object motion. This account was examined in the present study by measuring motion-tilt induction under different conditions in which the strength or salience of motion streaks was attenuated: by varying object speed (Experiment 1), contrast (Experiment 2), and trajectory/length by changing the element life-time within the stimulus (Experiment 3). It was predicted that, as motion streaks become less available, background lines would less affect the perceived direction of motion. Consistent with this prediction, the results indicated that, with a reduction in object speed below that required to generate motion streaks (, 1.128/s), Weber contrast (, 0.125) and motion streak length (two frames) reduced or extinguished the motion-tilt-induction effect. The findings of the present study are consistent with previous reports and computational models that directly combine form and motion information to provide an effective determinant of motion direction. Keywords: geometric illusions, kinetic Zollner illusion, motion streaks, motion and form interaction, spatial vision Khuu, S. K. (2012). The role of motion streaks in the perception of the kinetic Zollner illusion. Journal of Vision, 12(6):19, 1– 14, http://www.journalofvision.org/content/12/6/19, doi:10.1167/12.6.19 see Fineman & Melingonis, 1977;Wenderoth& Introduction Johnson, 1983; c.f., Watamaniuk, 2005). Despite the fact that geometric illusions are simplis- In classic examples of optical geometric illusions such tic in construction and form, their investigation as the Zollner and Hering illusions (Burmester, 1896; provides valuable insight into the functional nature of Coren & Girgus, 1978; Hering, 1861; Orbison, 1939; mechanisms that code orientation and, more generally, Zollner, 1860), straight target lines appear tilted in the the way in which the visual system represents space (see direction opposite to the oriented background lines Gillam, 1998; Westheimer, 2008). For example, it is the upon which they are superimposed. Geometric distor- consensus view that tilt-induction effects observed in tions of space are not limited to static stimuli, also static geometric illusions reflect lateral/mutual inhibi- occurring when the path of a moving object traverses tion between orientation-tuned detectors with overlap- tilted background lines. This so-called ‘‘motion-tilt ping orientation-tuning profiles (see Blakemore, induction’’ effect has been reported for kinetic versions Carpenter, & Georgeson, 1970; Carpenter & Blake- of both the Zollner and Hering illusions (Swanston, more, 1973; Day, 1973; Eagleman, 2001; Westheimer, 1984); analogous to static forms of these illusions, tilted 2008; Wallace, 1975; note that, though this explanation background lines deflect the path of motion in the is by no means exhaustive, see Gillam, 1998; Morgan & opposite direction. A similar effect was reported by Casco, 1990). Line-repulsion effects arise because Cesaro and Agostini (1998): an object traversing a orientation-tuned detectors coding both the target straight horizontal path across a background of lines and background lines (that differ slightly in orienta- that alternate in tilt direction appears to take on a tion) are mutually inhibiting, shifting the peak of their sinusoidal ‘‘slalom’’ trajectory. Likewise, motion-tilt tuning profile in opposite directions. Indeed, previous induction has been noted for a kinetic version of the studies have shown that lateral inhibition accurately Poggendorff illusion. In this case, the motion path of an predicts the degree and direction of tilt induction as the obliquely translating element appears misaligned when angular separation between target and background passing behind a static occluder (Nihei, 1973, 1975; also lines increases. However, while both physiological doi: 10.1167/12.6.19 Received September 18, 2011; published June 12, 2012 ISSN 1534-7362 Ó 2012 ARVO Downloaded from jov.arvojournals.org on 09/27/2021 Journal of Vision (2012) 12(6):19, 1–14 Khuu 2 (Blakemore & Tobin, 1972) and computational models motion-selective cell with that of an orientation- proposing lateral inhibition (e.g., Morikawa, 1987) are selective cell tuned for extracting the orientation of well developed to account for tilt induction in static the motion streak. The advantage of this neural geometric illusions, it remains unclear whether analo- circuitry is that, because motion streaks have compar- gous operations apply to kinetic versions of these atively narrower bandwidths than motion-selective illusions. units, orientation-tuned mechanisms provide greater Swanston (1984) speculated that distortion to the precision in signaling direction, aiding the computation motion path induced by oriented background lines in of motion. Indeed, if motion streaks are effectively kinetic forms of the illusion reflects reciprocal interac- masked or degraded, it has been shown that luminance tions between separate mechanisms sensitive to spatial thresholds for detecting a moving dot (Geisler, 1999) orientation and motion direction. It is indeed possible and discriminating the direction of motion are com- that mutual inhibition between the tuning profiles of paratively elevated (Burr & Ross, 2002). orientation-tuned detectors coding the background The reliance of the visual system on the orientation lines and direction selective cells sensing the direction of motion streaks in signaling direction of motion of object motion can account for the reported motion- presents a new hypothesis for the mechanisms under- tilt-induction effects. However, while it has been well pinning kinetic geometric illusions. In the present demonstrated that inhibition occurs between detectors study, it is proposed that kinetic geometric illusions both selective for either orientation or motion (and reflect a reciprocal interaction between orientation- accounting for repulsion effects in each stimulus tuned detectors sensing the motion streak produced by domain), it is unclear whether such a process occurs the movement of the object and the orientation of between cells separately selective for orientation and background lines. Background lines may distort the motion. Importantly, previous studies have instead orientation of the motion streak, and when combined established that cells in the visual cortex are sensitive to with the output of a motion detector (as proposed by both orientation and motion information (e.g., see Geisler, 1999, and confirmed by Or et al., 2007), the Albright, 1984; Krekelberg, Dannenberg, Hoffmann, perceived direction of motion is distorted. The possi- Bremmer, & Ross, 2003; Lennie, 1998), and the outputs bility that motion streaks are important to the of such cells are likely to represent a combination of explanation of kinetic geometric illusions is supported orientation and motion information rather than mutual by a recent investigation by Apthorp and Alais (2009), inhibition. Indeed, evidence that the visual system who showed that motion streaks produced by a combines form and motion information is well background of moving dots tilt the perceived orienta- supported by recent behavioral studies demonstrating tion of a centrally presented grating. The effect is that the perceived direction of moving oriented analogous to static forms of the tilt illusion. Tilt elements is influenced by its orientation (e.g., Krekel- induction only arose when moving dots produced berg et al., 2003; Or, Khuu, & Hayes, 2010). These strong motion streaks at fast speeds or followed observations therefore cast doubt on existing assump- extended trajectories. While Apthorp and Alais showed tions about the mechanisms underpinning kinetic that motion streaks affect the perceived orientation of geometric illusions. The goal of the present study is static lines, it is still unclear whether the motion-tilt to revisit geometric illusions, seeking a more inclusive induction observed in kinetic geometric illusions arises and comprehensive explanation; one that, by necessity, because background lines affect orientation-tuned units considers the interaction between form and motion to extracting motion streaks. The present study investi- account for the effect. gates this possibility. Recently, Geisler (1999) proposed that the visual If motion-tilt induction does indeed arise from system directly considers the outputs of orientation- lateral inhibition (or an analogous operation) between tuned neurons (e.g., simple cells) when determining the background orientation and the motion streak direction of motion. Because such neurons integrate produced by object motion, it would be predicted that information