ArticleJournal of vision2021
A dynamic noise background reveals perceptual motion extrapolation: The twinkle-goes illusion.
Article in Journal of vision, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Regaining Visual Acuity Does Not Restore Motion Extrapolation Deficits in Amblyopia.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025Article
- Temporal dynamics of the twinkle-goes illusion and its relationship to neural theta oscillations.Experimental brain research · 2025Article
- Temporal dynamics of motion compression: a lagged extrapolation account.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- No Evidence That Resting-State Individual Alpha Frequency Represents a Mechanism Underlying Motion-Position Illusions.The European journal of neuroscience · 2025Article
- Concurrent perception of competing predictions: A "split-stimulus effect".Journal of vision · 2024Article
- Corrective mechanisms of motion extrapolation.Journal of vision · 2024Article
- Exploring the extent to which shared mechanisms contribute to motion-position illusions.Journal of vision · 2023Article
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
We find that on a dynamic noise background, the perceived disappearance location of a moving object is shifted in the direction of motion. This "twinkle-goes" illusion does not require luminance- or chromaticity-based confusability of the object with the background, or on the amount of background motion energy in the same direction as the object motion. This suggests that the illusion is enabled by the dynamic noise masking the offset transients that otherwise accompany an object's disappearance. While these results are consistent with an anticipatory process that pre-activates positions ahead of the object's current position, additional findings suggest an alternative account: a continuation of attentional tracking after the object disappears. First, the shift increased with speed until over 1.2 revolutions per second (rps), nearing the attentional tracking limit. Second, the shift was greatly reduced when attention was divided between two moving objects. Finally, the illusion was associated with a delay in simple reaction time to the disappearance of the object. We propose that in the absence of offset transients, attentional tracking keeps moving for several tens of milliseconds after the target disappearance, and this causes one to hallucinate a moving object at the position of attention.
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.