Abstract
Human visual systems are much more sensitive to relative motion than to absolute motion. For example, the relative motion of two dots on a blank background is more easily detected than the motion of a single dot on a blank background. If both dots are also moved relative to the background, then their motion relative to each other remains more easily detected than their motion relative to the background. Each dot thus seems to provide a reference frame for the other’s motion.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
K. Koffka. “Principles of Gestalt Psychology,” Harcourt, Brace and Company, New York (1935).
J. Ternus, Experimentelle Untersuchungen über phänomenale Identität, Psych. Forsch. 7: 81–136 (1926).
G. Johansson. “Configurations in Event Perception,” Uppsala: Almquist and Wiksells Boktryckeri AB (1950).
G. Johansson, About visual event perception, in: “Persistence and Change: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Event Perception,” W.H. Warren and R.E. Shaw, eds., LEA, Hillsdale, NJ (1985).
V. S. Ramachandran, V. Inada, and G. Kiama, Perception of illusory occlusion in apparent motion, Vision Research 26: 1741–1749 (1986).
J. A. Marshall, R. K. Alley, and R. S. Hubbard, Learning to predict visibility and invisibility from occlusion events, in: “Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 8,” D.S. Touretzky, M.C. Mozer, and M.E. Hasselmo, eds., Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo, CA (1996).
J. K. Kruschke and M. M. Pragassi, The perception of causality: Feature binding in interacting objects, in: “Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society,” Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ (1996).
D. Kahneman, A. Treisman and B. J. Gibbs, The reviewing of object files: Object-specific integration of information, Cognitive Psychology 24: 175–219 (1992).
R. S. Hubbard and J. A. Marshall, Self-organizing neural network model of the visual inertia phenomenon in motion perception, Technical Report 94-001, Department of Computer Science, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 26 pp., (1994).
J. A. Marshall, Self-organizing neural networks for perception of visual motion, Neural Networks 3: 45–74 (1990).
J. A. Marshall, Unsupervised learning of contextual constraints in neural networks for simultaneous visual processing of multiple objects, in: “Neural and Stochastic Methods in Image and Signal Processing,” S. S. Chen, ed., Proceedings of the SPIE, San Diego, CA, 1766: 84–93 (1992).
J. A. Marshall, Adaptive perceptual pattern recognition by self-organizing neural networks: Context, uncertainty, multiplicity, and scale, Neural Networks 8: 335–362 (1995).
C. P. Schmitt and J. A. Marshall, Development of a neural circuit for motion grouping and disambiguation, Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science 36(4): 377 (1995).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1998 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Marshall, J.A., Schmitt, C.P., Kalarickal, G.J., Alley, R.K. (1998). Neural Model of Transfer-of-Binding in Visual Relative Motion Perception. In: Bower, J.M. (eds) Computational Neuroscience. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-4831-7_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-4831-7_14
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-7190-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-4831-7
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive