October 2003
Volume 3, Issue 9
Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting Abstract  |   October 2003
Does tracking disappearing objects in MOT involve predicting the locus of reappearance?
Author Affiliations
  • Brian P Keane
    Rutgers University Center for Cognitive Science
Journal of Vision October 2003, Vol.3, 583. doi:https://doi.org/10.1167/3.9.583
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Brian P Keane, Zenon Pylyshyn; Does tracking disappearing objects in MOT involve predicting the locus of reappearance?. Journal of Vision 2003;3(9):583. https://doi.org/10.1167/3.9.583.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

Purpose. In Multiple Object Tracking (MOT), subjects follow a flashed subset of identical visual objects that move independently about a display. It is known that under some conditions it is possible to track objects even when they completely disappear from view (e.g. Scholl and Pylyshyn (1998)). Our primary aim in this study is to examine whether tracking mechanisms are predictive, and, in particular, whether subjects track better when objects reappear at a location predicted by their trajectories rather than at some other location, such as at the location at which they disappeared. A secondary aim is to see for how long objects can disappear without significantly interfering with tracking. Methods. Four of eight objects momentarily flash, and subjects are asked to track the flashed objects for 5 seconds. Midway into each trial, all objects on the screen disappear and reappear either a) at point of disappearance (“non-move” condition); or b) at a position consistent with trajectory (“move” condition). Three disappearance intervals were used: 150ms, 300ms, and 450ms. Results. Subjects tracked better in the non-move condition than in the move condition for all disappearance durations. For the move condition subjects tracked best in the shortest disappearance interval and worst in the longest. There was no significant difference between performance at the different disappearance durations for the non-move condition. Conclusion. The main conclusion suggested by this experiment is that objects are not tracked predictively for disappearance durations we have examined (up to 450 ms). Subjects appear to only keep track of where objects disappear and not where they are likely to reappear.

Keane, B. P., Pylyshyn, Z.(2003). Does tracking disappearing objects in MOT involve predicting the locus of reappearance? [Abstract]. Journal of Vision, 3( 9): 583, 583a, http://journalofvision.org/3/9/583/, doi:10.1167/3.9.583. [CrossRef]

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.