ArticleJournal of vision2020
Pitting optic flow, object motion, and biological motion against each other.
Article in Journal of vision, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of visual cues on scene-relative object motion judgments and concurrent heading estimation from optic flow.Journal of vision · 2025Article
- Illusory percepts of curvilinear self-motion when moving through crowds.Journal of vision · 2023Article
- Visual perception of travel distance for self-motion through crowds.Journal of vision · 2023Article
- Flow parsing and biological motion.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2021Article
- Limb articulation of biological motion can induce illusory motion perception during self-motion.i-PerceptionArticle
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Heading estimation from optic flow is crucial for safe locomotion but becomes inaccurate if independent object motion is present. In ecological settings, such motion typically involves other animals or humans walking across the scene. An independently walking person presents a local disturbance of the flow field, which moves across the flow field as the walker traverses the scene. Is the bias in heading estimation produced by the local disturbance of the flow field or by the movement of the walker through the scene? We present a novel flow field stimulus in which the local flow disturbance and the movement of the walker can be pitted against each other. Each frame of this stimulus consists of a structureless random dot distribution. Across frames, the body shape of a walker is molded by presenting different flow field dynamics within and outside the body shape. In different experimental conditions, the flow within the body shape can be congruent with the walker's movement, incongruent with it, or congruent with the background flow. We show that heading inaccuracy results from the local flow disturbance rather than the movement through the scene. Moreover, we show that the local disturbances of the optic flow can be used to segment the walker and support biological motion perception to some degree. The dichotomous result that the walker can be segmented from the scene but that heading perception is nonetheless influenced by the flow produced by the walker confirms separate visual pathways for heading estimation, object segmentation, and biological motion perception.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.