1,721,588 research outputs found
Linguistic Representations of Motion Do Not Depend on the Visual Motion System
No full textEmbodied semantics proposes that constructing the meaning of motion verb phrases relies on representations of motion in sensory cortex. However, the data reported by earlier studies as evidence for this claim are also explained by a symbolic-semantics view proposing interactions between dissociable systems. In the experiments reported here, participants were visually adapted to real and implied leftward or rightward motion, which produced a motion aftereffect opposite to the direction of the adapting stimulus. Participants then decided whether a directionally ambiguous or a leftward- or rightward-directional verb phrase implied leftward or rightward motion. Because the visual system is engaged in the motion aftereffect, embodied semantics predicts that responses in the motion-aftereffect direction (opposite to the direction of the adapting stimulus) are facilitated, whereas symbolic semantics predicts response facilitation in the direction of the adapting stimulus (opposite to the direction of the motion aftereffect). We found response facilitation in the direction of real- and implied-motion adapting stimuli in ambiguous and directional verb phrases. These results suggest that visual and linguistic representations of motion can be dissociated. © The Author(s) 2012
Definizione, strumenti di accertamento e prevalenza dei disturbi da stress post traumatico correlati alle cure intensive: revisione narrativa della letteratura
No full textThe subjective duration of audiovisual looming and receding stimuli
No full textLooming visual stimuli (log-increasing in proximal size over time) and auditory stimuli (of increasing sound intensity over time) have been shown to be perceived as longer than receding visual and auditory stimuli (i. e., looming stimuli reversed in time). Here, we investigated whether such asymmetry in subjective duration also occurs for audiovisual looming and receding stimuli, as well as for stationary stimuli (i. e., stimuli that do not change in size and/or intensity over time). Our results showed a great temporal asymmetry in audition but a null asymmetry in vision. In contrast, the asymmetry in audiovision was moderate, suggesting that multisensory percepts arise from the integration of unimodal percepts in a maximum-likelihood fashion. © 2012 Psychonomic Society, Inc
Distinct position assignment mechanisms revealed by cross-order motion
No full textMotion perception influences perceived position. It has been shown that first-order (luminance defined) motion shifts perceived position across a wide range of spatial and temporal frequencies. On the other hand, second-order (contrast defined) motion shifts perceived position over a narrow range of temporal frequencies, regardless of spatial frequency [Bressler, D. W., & Whitney, D. (2006). Second-order motion shifts perceived position. Vision Research, 46(6-7), 1120-1128]. These results suggest the presence of distinct position assignment mechanisms for first- and second-order motion. We investigated whether the first- and second-order systems independently encode and assign the position of a moving stimulus. To measure motion induced position shift we presented two horizontally offset Gabors placed above and below a central fixation point, with sine wave carriers drifting in opposite directions. Subjects judged the position of the top Gabor relative to the bottom one. We used both first-order Gabors (sinusoidal luminance modulation of a dynamic noise carrier enveloped by a static Gaussian) and second-order Gabors (sinusoidal contrast modulation of a dynamic noise carrier enveloped by a static Gaussian). Results showed a strong position shift in the direction of the carrier motion when both Gabors were first-order, a weak position shift when both Gabors were second-order, and no appreciable position shift when one Gabor was first-order and the other was second-order (cross-order motion). The absence of a position shift using cross-order motion supports the hypothesis that the two motion systems independently encode and assign the position of a moving object. These results are consistent with those of experiments investigating global spatial interactions between static first-order and second-order Gabor patches, indicating a commonality in the underlying spatial integration processes. © 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved
Motion-induced position shifts occur after motion integration
No full textLow-level motion processing in the primate visual system involves two stages. The first stage (in V1) contains specialised motion sensors which respond to local retinal motion, and the second stage (in MT) pools local signals to encode rigid surface motion. Recent psychophysical research shows that motion signals influence the perceived position of an object (motion-induced position shift, MIPS). In the present paper we investigate the role played by the two processing stages in generating MIPS. We compared MIPS induced by single grating components (Gabor patches) to MIPS induced by plaids created by combining pairs of components. If motion signals at the lowest level of motion analysis (V1) influence position assignment, MIPS from plaids should reflect the position shift induced by each component when presented separately. On the other hand, if signals generated in MT (or later) influence perceived position, then MIPS from plaids should be consistent with a motion integration computation on the components. Results showed that MIPS from plaids is larger than the MIPS obtained from individual components, and can be explained by the output of an integration process that combines intersection-of-constraints and vector-sum computations. © 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved
Fracture mechanics analysis of rubber modified polyamide-6: temperature and rate effect with varying rubber content
No full text
- …
