Special Issue "Visual Motion Processing"

A special issue of Vision (ISSN 2411-5150).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (15 January 2019)

Special Issue Editor

Guest Editor
Dr. Chris Klink

1. Department of Vision & Cognition, Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience, Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences
2. Department of Psychiatry, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam
Website | E-Mail

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

For humans, and many other visually-oriented animals, interacting with a dynamic world requires the accurate analysis of visual motion information. The neural mechanisms of visual motion processing interact with those from other senses and cognitive functions, ultimately giving rise to (visual) motion perception and behavior. For this Special Issue on “Visual Motion Processing”, we invite a broad mixture of original and review articles aimed at understanding these neural mechanisms of visual motion processing and visual motion perception. We especially welcome contribution that focus on mechanistic understanding of the relationship between neural mechanisms and perception or behavior.

Suggested topics could include, but are not limited to:

  • Linking neural mechanisms of motion processing and behavior.
  • Cross-species comparisons of motion processing mechanisms.
  • Multimodal motion perception (e.g., audiovisual, vestibulovisual).
  • Motion processing and perception in health and disease.
  • Motion processing in depth.
  • Motion adaptation mechanisms.
  • Contextual influences on motion processing and perception.
  • The cortical and subcortical organization of motion processing mechanisms.
  • Computational models of motion processing.
  • The relation between object/shape processing and motion processing (e.g., structure from motion, motion from structure, perceptual binding, biological motion, implied motion).
  • Conscious and unconscious contributions to motion processing.
  • Reference frames for visual motion perception.

If you are considering writing a review article, please send us a brief proposal before submitting a full manuscript.

Dr. Chris Klink
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All papers will be peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Vision is an international peer-reviewed open access quarterly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) is waived for well-prepared manuscripts submitted to this issue. Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • Motion
  • Perception
  • Vision
  • Neural mechanism
  • Computational modeling
  • fMRI
  • EEG/MEG
  • ECoG
  • Optical imaging
  • Electrophysiology
  • Human
  • Animal

Published Papers (4 papers)

View options order results:
result details:
Displaying articles 1-4
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review

Open AccessArticle
Dynamic Cancellation of Perceived Rotation from the Venetian Blind Effect
Received: 2 March 2019 / Revised: 28 March 2019 / Accepted: 30 March 2019 / Published: 3 April 2019
PDF Full-text (1369 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text | Supplementary Files
Abstract
Geometric differences between the images seen by each eye enable the perception of depth. Additionally, depth is produced in the absence of geometric disparities with binocular disparities in either the average luminance or contrast, which is known as the Venetian blind effect. The [...] Read more.
Geometric differences between the images seen by each eye enable the perception of depth. Additionally, depth is produced in the absence of geometric disparities with binocular disparities in either the average luminance or contrast, which is known as the Venetian blind effect. The temporal dynamics of the Venetian blind effect are much slower (1.3 Hz) than those for geometric binocular disparities (4–5 Hz). Sine-wave modulations of luminance and contrast disparity, however, can be discriminated from square-wave modulations at 1 Hz, which suggests a non-linearity. To measure this non-linearity, a luminance or contrast disparity modulation was presented at a particular frequency and paired with a geometric disparity modulation that cancelled the perceived rotation induced by the luminance or contrast modulation. Phases between the luminance or contrast and the geometric modulation varied in 50 ms increments from −200 and 200 ms. When phases were aligned, observers perceived little or no rotation. When not aligned, a perceived rotation was induced by a contrast or luminance disparity that was then cancelled by the geometric disparity. This causes the perception of a slight jump. The Generalized Difference Model, which is linear in time, predicted a minimal probability in cases when luminance or contrast disparities occurred before the geometric disparities due to the slower dynamics of the Venetian blind effect. The Gated Generalized Difference Model, which is non-linear in time, predicted a minimal probability for offsets of 0 ms. Results followed the Gated model, which further suggests a non-linearity in time for the Venetian blind effect. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Visual Motion Processing)
Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle
The Effect of Stimulus Area on Global Motion Thresholds in Children and Adults
Received: 11 January 2019 / Revised: 27 February 2019 / Accepted: 8 March 2019 / Published: 14 March 2019
PDF Full-text (1550 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
Performance on random-dot global motion tasks may reach adult-like levels before 4 or as late as 16 years of age, depending on the specific parameters used to create the stimuli. Later maturation has been found for slower speeds, smaller spatial displacements, and sparser [...] Read more.
Performance on random-dot global motion tasks may reach adult-like levels before 4 or as late as 16 years of age, depending on the specific parameters used to create the stimuli. Later maturation has been found for slower speeds, smaller spatial displacements, and sparser dot arrays. This protracted development on global motion tasks may depend on limitations specific to spatial aspects of a motion stimulus rather than to motion mechanisms per se. The current study investigated the impact of varying stimulus area (9, 36, and 81 deg2) on the global motion coherence thresholds of children 4–6 years old and adults for three signal dot displacements (∆x = 1, 5, and 30 arcmin). We aimed to determine whether children could achieve mature performance for the smallest displacements, a condition previously found to show late maturation, when a larger stimulus area was used. Coherence thresholds were higher in children compared to adults in the 1 and 5 arcmin displacement conditions, as reported previously, and this did not change as a function of stimulus area. However, both children and adults performed better with a larger stimulus area in the 30 arcmin displacement condition only. This suggests that immature spatial integration, as measured by stimulus area, cannot account for immaturities in global motion perception. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Visual Motion Processing)
Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle
Temporal Integration of Motion Streaks in Migraine
Received: 2 May 2018 / Revised: 11 July 2018 / Accepted: 11 July 2018 / Published: 13 July 2018
Cited by 1 | PDF Full-text (726 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text | Supplementary Files
Abstract
Migraine is associated with differences in visual perception, specifically, deficits in the perception of motion. Migraine groups commonly show poorer performance (higher thresholds) on global motion tasks compared to control groups. Successful performance on a global motion task depends on several factors, including [...] Read more.
Migraine is associated with differences in visual perception, specifically, deficits in the perception of motion. Migraine groups commonly show poorer performance (higher thresholds) on global motion tasks compared to control groups. Successful performance on a global motion task depends on several factors, including integrating signals over time. A “motion streak” task was used to investigate specifically integration over time in migraine and control groups. The motion streak effect depends on the integration of a moving point over time to create the illusion of a line, or “streak”. There was evidence of a slower optimum speed for eliciting the motion streak effect in migraine compared to control groups, suggesting temporal integration is different in migraine. In addition, performance on the motion streak task showed a relationship with headache frequency. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Visual Motion Processing)
Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research

Open AccessReview
A Review of Motion and Orientation Processing in Migraine
Received: 29 January 2019 / Accepted: 7 March 2019 / Published: 27 March 2019
PDF Full-text (1372 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
Visual tests can be used as noninvasive tools to test models of the pathophysiology underlying neurological conditions, such as migraine. They may also be used to track changes in performance that vary with the migraine cycle or can track the efficacy of prophylactic [...] Read more.
Visual tests can be used as noninvasive tools to test models of the pathophysiology underlying neurological conditions, such as migraine. They may also be used to track changes in performance that vary with the migraine cycle or can track the efficacy of prophylactic treatments. This article reviews the literature on performance differences on two visual tasks, global motion discrimination and orientation, which, of the many visual tasks that have been used to compare differences between migraine and control groups, have yielded the most consistent patterns of group differences. The implications for understanding the underlying pathophysiology in migraine are discussed, but the main focus is on bringing together disparate areas of research and suggesting those that can reveal practical uses of visual tests to treat and manage migraine. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Visual Motion Processing)
Figures

Figure 1

Vision EISSN 2411-5150 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top