In the literature on MAE, it is well established that different levels of motion adaptation can be examined with test stimuli that are either static or dynamic (the static or dynamic test). The motion aftereffect with a stationary test pattern (static test) shows position specificity (Anstis & Gregory,
1965), spatial frequency selectivity (Cameron, Baker, & Boulton,
1992), and partial interocular transfer (Wade, Swanston, & de Weert,
1993). These characteristics reveal that MAE evoked with a static test (static MAE/sMAE) reflects adaptation in the motion system located at the early level. In contrast, MAE with a dynamic test, where a flickering or counter-phasing grating is presented as a test pattern, shows weaker position specificity and spatial frequency selectivity (Ashida & Osaka,
1994; Culham, Verstraten, Ashida, & Cavanagh,
2000) and shows robust interocular transfer (Nishida, Ashida, & Sato,
1994; Raymond,
1993). Therefore, the MAE evoked with a dynamic test (dynamic MAE/dMAE) reflects high-level adaptation (Nishida & Ashida,
2000; Nishida et al.,
1994; Nishida & Sato,
1995). We employed different types of test stimulus and interocular transfer measurements to examine binocular suppression in lower and higher processing levels separately.