Kristina Zeljic, Joshua A. Solomon, Michael J. Morgan
{"title":"Individual differences in direction-selective motion adaptation revealed by change-detection performance","authors":"Kristina Zeljic, Joshua A. Solomon, Michael J. Morgan","doi":"10.1016/j.visres.2024.108490","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The motion aftereffect (MAE) and motion adaptation in general are usually considered to be universal phenomena. However, in a preliminary study using a bias-free measure of the MAE we found some individuals who showed at best a weak effect of adaptation. These same individuals also performed poorly in a “change detection“ test of motion adaptation based on visual search, leading to the conjecture that there is a bimodality in the population with respect to motion adaptation. The present study tested this possibility by screening 102 participants on two versions of the change-detection task while also considering potential confounding factors including eye movements, practice-based improvements, and deficits in visual search ability. The 5 strongest and the 5 weakest change detectors were selected for further testing of motion detection and contrast detection after adaptation. Data showed an inverse association between change-detection ability and performance in the motion-detection task. We extend previous findings by also showing <em>i</em>) the weakest change detectors exhibit less direction selectivity in their contrast thresholds after adapting to drifting gratings and <em>ii</em>) the ability to detect change in motion direction correlates with the ability to detect change in spatial orientation. Group differences between the strongest and weakest change detectors cannot be attributed to a lack of practice, nor can they be explained by poor fixation ability. Our results suggest genuine individual differences in the degree to which adaptation is specific to stimulus orientation and direction of motion.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23670,"journal":{"name":"Vision Research","volume":"225 ","pages":"Article 108490"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vision Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0042698924001342","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The motion aftereffect (MAE) and motion adaptation in general are usually considered to be universal phenomena. However, in a preliminary study using a bias-free measure of the MAE we found some individuals who showed at best a weak effect of adaptation. These same individuals also performed poorly in a “change detection“ test of motion adaptation based on visual search, leading to the conjecture that there is a bimodality in the population with respect to motion adaptation. The present study tested this possibility by screening 102 participants on two versions of the change-detection task while also considering potential confounding factors including eye movements, practice-based improvements, and deficits in visual search ability. The 5 strongest and the 5 weakest change detectors were selected for further testing of motion detection and contrast detection after adaptation. Data showed an inverse association between change-detection ability and performance in the motion-detection task. We extend previous findings by also showing i) the weakest change detectors exhibit less direction selectivity in their contrast thresholds after adapting to drifting gratings and ii) the ability to detect change in motion direction correlates with the ability to detect change in spatial orientation. Group differences between the strongest and weakest change detectors cannot be attributed to a lack of practice, nor can they be explained by poor fixation ability. Our results suggest genuine individual differences in the degree to which adaptation is specific to stimulus orientation and direction of motion.
期刊介绍:
Vision Research is a journal devoted to the functional aspects of human, vertebrate and invertebrate vision and publishes experimental and observational studies, reviews, and theoretical and computational analyses. Vision Research also publishes clinical studies relevant to normal visual function and basic research relevant to visual dysfunction or its clinical investigation. Functional aspects of vision is interpreted broadly, ranging from molecular and cellular function to perception and behavior. Detailed descriptions are encouraged but enough introductory background should be included for non-specialists. Theoretical and computational papers should give a sense of order to the facts or point to new verifiable observations. Papers dealing with questions in the history of vision science should stress the development of ideas in the field.