Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19761342›Full record

ArticleJournal of vision2009

Visual motion aftereffects arise from a cascade of two isomorphic adaptation mechanisms.

Alan A Stocker, Eero P Simoncelli

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of vision, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Neural tuning and representational geometry.Nature reviews. Neuroscience · 2021
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Object size determines the spatial spread of visual time.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2016
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Signal Integration in Human Visual Speed Perception.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2015
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Alan A StockerDepartment of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6228, USA. astocker@sas.upenn.edu
Eero P Simoncelli

Funding

Howard Hughes Medical Institute
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prolonged exposure to a moving stimulus can substantially alter the perceived velocity (both speed and direction) of subsequently presented stimuli. Here, we show that these changes can be parsimoniously explained with a model that combines the effects of two isomorphic adaptation mechanisms, one nondirectional and one directional. Each produces a pattern of velocity biases that serves as an observable "signature" of the corresponding mechanism. The net effect on perceived velocity is a superposition of these two signatures. By examining human velocity judgments in the context of different adaptor velocities, we are able to separate these two signatures. The model fits the data well, successfully predicts subjects' behavior in an additional experiment using a nondirectional adaptor, and is in agreement with a variety of previous experimental results. As such, the model provides a unifying explanation for the diversity of motion aftereffects.

Indexed as

Models, NeurologicalAdaptation, PhysiologicalDiscrimination, PsychologicalHumansMotion PerceptionPhotic StimulationPsychophysicsVisual Pathways

Identifiers

PMID19761342
PMCPMC3718883

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.