Not only translations and rotations, but also intriguing ‘plastic deformations’ are observed in apparent motion. What kinds of invariants does the visual system depend on during these transformations to determine that two figures of different shapes nevertheless represent the same object? Experiments are reported in which seven pairs of stimuli with topological differences were used. The evidence suggests that topological invariants may be used in the perception of apparent motion. In spite of variations in other factors, such as brightness, spatial frequency, terminators, etc, subjects displayed a strong preference for motion from a central figure to a figure with the same topological invariants. The results emphasize the importance of topological structure in figure perception.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AleksandrovA DKolmogorovA NLavrent'evM A, (Eds) 1963Mathematics, Its Contents, Methods, and Meaning translated from Russian by HirschK, (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).
2.
AnstisS M, 1978“Apparent movement” in Handbook of Sensory PhysiologyVolume 8, Eds HeldRLeibowitzH WTeuberH-L, (New York: Springer).
3.
ChenL, 1980“Tolerance spaces and Gestalt”Proceedings of the 3rd Biophysical Academic Conference of China, Beijing; also in Acta Psychologica Sinica 1984 3259–266.
4.
ChenL, 1981“Perceptual organization and tolerance spaces”paper presented at the 14th Annual Mathematical Psychology Meeting, Santa Barbara.
5.
ChenL, 1982a“What are the units of figure perceptual representation?”Studies in Cognitive Science (22) Bulletin issued by the School of Social Sciences, University of California at Irvine, Irvine, CA.
6.
ChenL, 1982b“Topological structure in visual perception”Science218669–700.
7.
ChenL, 1982c“Connectedness and the object superiority effect”Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Supplement22124.
8.
ChenL, 1982d“Competing organization with several simultaneous factors”Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, September 145–146.
9.
Hinton, 1980“Inferring the meaning of direct perception”The Behavioral and Brain Science3387.
10.
JuleszB, 1981“Figure and ground perception in brief presented isodiopole texture” in Perceptual Organization Eds KubovyMPomerantzJ L, (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum).
11.
JuleszB, 1982“Textons, the elements of texture perception, and their interactions”Nature (London)29091–97.
12.
KolersP A, 1972Aspects of Motion Perception (New York: Pergamon Press).
13.
KolersP APomerantzJ R, 1971“Figural change in apparent motion”Journal of Experimental Psychology8799–108.
14.
McClellandJ L, 1978“Perception and masking of wholes and parts”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance4210–229.
15.
MarrD, 1979“Representing visual information” in Lectures on Mathematics in the Life Sciencesvolume 10, 101–180 (reprinted in Computer Vision Systems Eds HansonA RRiesmanE M) (New York: Academic Press).
16.
MarrD, 1982Vision (San Francisco: Freeman).
17.
MinskyMPapertS, 1969Perceptrons (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).
18.
OlsonR KAttneaveF, 1970“What variables produce similarity grouping?”American Journal of Psychology831–23.
19.
PalmerS E, 1978“Structural aspects of visual similarity”Memory and Cognition691–97.
20.
PomerantzJ R, 1980“Are complex visual features derived from simple ones?” in Formal Theory of Visual Perception Eds LeeuwenbertE I JBuffartH F M, (New York: John Wiley).
21.
PomerantzJ RSagerL CStoeverR J, 1977“Perception of wholes and their component parts: Some configural effects”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance3422–435.
22.
RamachandranV S, 1981“Perception of apparent motion” in Studies in the Cognitive Sciences, Volume II Bulletin issued by the School of Social Sciences, University of California, Irvine, CA.
23.
RamachandranV SGinsburgA PAnstisS M, 1983“Low spatial frequencies dominate apparent motion”Perception12451–461.
24.
RamachandranV SRaoV MVidyasagarT R, 1973“Apparent movement with subjective contours”Vision Research131399–1401.
25.
RileyM, 1982 in Marr (1982) pp 94, 191–193, 199.
26.
ShepardR NJuddS A, 1976“Perceptual illusion of rotation of three-dimensional objects”Science191952–954.
27.
ShepardR NCooperL, 1982Mental Images and Their Transformations (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).
28.
UllmanS, 1979The Interpretation of Visual Motion (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).
29.
WeissteinNHarrisC S, 1974“Visual detection of line segments: An object-superiority effect”Science186725–755.
30.
WilliamsAWeissteinN, 1978“Line segments are perceived better in coherent context than alone: An object superiority effect in visual perception”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Memory and Cognition685–90.
31.
ZeemanE C, 1962“The topology of the brain and visual perception” in Topology of 3-manifolds Ed FortK, (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall).
32.
ZeemanE CBunemanO P, 1964“Tolerance spaces and the brain” in Mathematics and Computer Science in Biology and Medicine, Proceedings of Conference held by the Medical Research Council in association with the Health Departments, Oxford.
