Jove
Visualize
Contact Us

Related Experiment Videos

Pitfalls in estimating motion detector receptive field geometry

R E Fredericksen1, F A Verstraten, W A van de Grind

  • 1McGill Vision Research Unit, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. eric@bradman.vision.mcgill.ca

Vision Research
|January 1, 1997
PubMed
Summary

Previous methods for estimating motion detector receptive field (RF) geometry are unreliable. New findings reveal inaccuracies due to stimulus position, model fits, and visual anatomy, impacting motion perception research.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

The motion aftereffect.

Trends in cognitive sciences·2011
Same author

A gain-control model relating nulling results to the duration of dynamic motion aftereffects.

Vision research·2003
Same author

Temporal detection in human vision: dependence on eccentricity.

Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)·2002
Same author

Spatio-temporal tuning of motion coherence detection at different luminance levels.

Vision research·2002
Same author

Systematic eye movements do not account for the perception of motion during attentive tracking.

Vision research·2001
Same author

Visual motion and the human brain: what has neuroimaging told us?

Acta psychologica·2001
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Area of Science:

  • Neuroscience
  • Computational Vision
  • Psychophysics

Background:

  • Spatial-summation methods are commonly used to estimate receptive field (RF) geometry in motion detectors.
  • Estimates rely on how psychophysical thresholds vary with stimulus dimensions (height/width).
  • This assumes a direct link between stimulus geometry and RF properties influencing motion detection.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To re-evaluate the accuracy and reliability of psychophysical methods for estimating motion detector RF geometry.
  • To identify sources of error in previous RF geometry estimations.
  • To investigate the influence of stimulus parameters and visual anatomy on RF estimates.

Main Methods:

  • Utilized spatial-summation techniques with varying stimulus heights and widths.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Analyzed psychophysical thresholds for motion direction detection.
  • Compared empirical data with predictions from established motion detector models.

    • Main Results:

    • Receptive field (RF) geometry estimates are significantly influenced by stimulus position and height-to-width ratio.
    • Observed stimulus dependency contradicts predictions from current motion detector models.
    • Identified multiple sources of unreliability, including model fit parameters, confounding summation areas, and asymmetric spatiotemporal correlations.

    Conclusions:

    • Previous estimates of motion detector RF height, width, and ratios are inaccurate and unreliable.
    • A key source of error is the nonlinear, nonmonotonic distribution of motion detectors in the visual field, linked to visual anatomy.
    • Revised understanding of RF geometry is crucial for accurate motion perception models.