Elsevier

Vision Research

Volume 24, Issue 12, 1984, Pages 1765-1769
Vision Research

Movement adaptation in the peripheral retina

https://doi.org/10.1016/0042-6989(84)90007-5Get rights and content

Abstract

With strict fixation, the eye quickly adapts to moving periodic stimuli presented to the peripheral retina. A slowly spinning sector disk, 7° in diameter, will rapidly appear to slow down and come to a standstill (within 5–25 sec). The time required for this full motion adaptation decreases with

  • (a) increasing retinal eccentricity (30–70°);

  • (b) increasing number of sectors (16–60); and

  • (c) decreasing speed of rotation (0.3–0.05 rev/sec). After the standstill, the disk fades from view in much the same way as a stationary stimulus (Troxler effect). A spinning disk presented to the temporal retina appears to stop about 2.5 times faster than a disk presented to the nasal side. Adapting one eye reduces the time of adaptation for the other eye by 70%. If an aperiodic sector disk is used, no standstill is perceived.

Reference (19)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (60)

  • Speed change detection in foveal and peripheral vision

    2012, Vision Research
    Citation Excerpt :

    This gap in the literature is surprising, as many aspects of motion perception have been shown to deteriorate with eccentricity, e.g. absolute motion thresholds (Tynan & Sekuler, 1982) or speed discrimination (McKee & Nakayama, 1984; Orban et al., 1985). In addition, absolute motion is perceived slower under peripheral compared to foveal viewing conditions (Brown, 1931; Diener et al., 1976; Johnston & Wright, 1986; Tynan & Sekuler, 1982), and constantly moving stimuli in the periphery appear to decelerate or even stop within a viewing time of less than a second (Campbell & Maffei, 1979, 1981; Cohen, 1965; Hunzelmann & Spillmann, 1984; Lichtenstein, 1963; MacKay, 1982; Runeson, 1974). Interestingly, it has never been explored how these perceptual effects relate to adaptational processes and how they interfere with the detection or discrimination of physical motion.

  • Chapter 6 In honour of Lothar Spillmann - filling-in, wiggly lines, adaptation, and aftereffects

    2006, Progress in Brain Research
    Citation Excerpt :

    Changing (i.e., flickering or moving) targets are more resistant than static targets to disappearing. This does not mean that flickering or moving objects are a proof against disappearance: they are not (Campbell and Maffei, 1981; Hunzelmann and Spillmann, 1984; Schieting and Spillmann, 1987; Anstis, 1996). It merely means that statistically they are less likely to disappear.

View all citing articles on Scopus

Supported by Sonderforschungsbereich 70, Teilprojekt A6.

Part of this work was presented at the Fall-Meeting of the German Physiological Society in Gieβen, 1982; and at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology in Sarasota, Florida, 1983.

View full text