A dynamic noise background reveals perceptual motion extrapolation: The twinkle-goes illusion

Concurrent perception of competing predictions: A "split-stimulus effect"

Visual illusions are systematic misperceptions that can help us glean the heuristics with which the brain constructs visual experience. In a recently discovered visual illusion (the "frame effect"), it has been shown that flashing a stimulus inside of a moving frame produces a large misperception of that stimulus's position. Across two experiments, we investigated a novel illusion (the "split stimulus effect") where the symmetrical motion of two overlaid frames produces two simultaneous positional misperceptions of a single stimulus. That is, one stimulus is presented but two are perceived. In both experiments, a single red dot was flashed when the moving frames reversed direction, and participants were asked to report how many dots they saw. Naïve participants sometimes reported seeing two dots when only one was presented, indicating spontaneous perception of the illusion. A Bayesian analysis of the population prevalence of this effect was conducted. The dependence of this effect on the frames' speed, the dot's opacity, spatial attention, as the presence/absence of pre-flash motion ("postdiction") was also investigated, and the features of this illusion were compared to similar motion position illusions within a predictive processing framework. In demonstrating this illusory "splitting" effect, this study is the first to show that it is possible to be simultaneously aware of two opposing perceptual predictions about a single object and provides evidence of the hyperpriors that limit and inform the structure of visual experience.

Corrective mechanisms of motion extrapolation

Transmission and processing of sensory information in the visual system takes time. For motion perception, our brain can overcome this intrinsic neural delay through extrapolation mechanisms and accurately predict the current position of a continuously moving object. But how does the system behave when the motion abruptly changes and the prediction becomes wrong? Here we address this question by studying the perceived position of a moving object with various abrupt motion changes by human observers. We developed a task in which a bar is monotonously moving horizontally, and then motion suddenly stops, reverses, or disappears-then-reverses around two vertical stationary reference lines. Our results showed that participants overestimated the position of the stopping bar but did not perceive an overshoot in the motion reversal condition. When a temporal gap was added at the reverse point, the perceptual overshoot of the end point scaled with the gap durations. Our model suggests that the overestimation of the object position when it disappears is not linear as a function of its speeds but gradually fades out. These results can thus be reconciled in a single process where there is an interplay of the cortical motion prediction mechanisms and the late sensory transient visual inputs.

Exploring the extent to which shared mechanisms contribute to motion-position illusions

Motion-position illusions (MPIs) are visual motion illusions in which motion signals bias the perceived position of an object. Due to phenomenological similarities between these illusions, previous research has assumed that some are caused by common mechanisms. However, this assumption has yet to be directly tested. This study investigates this assumption by exploiting between-participant variations in illusion magnitude. During two sessions, 106 participants viewed the flash-lag effect, luminance flash-lag effect, Fröhlich effect, flash-drag effect, flash-grab effect, motion-induced position shift, twinkle-goes effect, and the flash-jump effect. For each effect, the magnitude of the illusion was reliable within participants, strongly correlating between sessions. When the pairwise correlations of averaged illusions magnitudes were explored, two clusters of statistically significant positively correlated illusions were identified. The first cluster comprised the flash-grab effect, motion-induced position shift, and twinkle-goes effect. The second cluster comprised the Fröhlich and flash-drag effect. The fact that within each of these two clusters, individual differences in illusion magnitude were correlated suggests that these clusters may reflect shared underlying mechanisms. An exploratory factor analysis provided additional evidence that these correlated clusters shared an underlying factor, with each cluster loading onto their own factor. Overall, our results reveal that, contrary to the prevailing perspective in the literature, while some motion-position illusions share processes, most of these illusions are unlikely to reflect any shared processes, instead implicating unique mechanisms.