September 2024
Volume 24, Issue 10
Open Access
Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting Abstract  |   September 2024
Motion discrimination around the visual field differs between adult humans and macaques
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Ekin Tünçok
    New York University
  • Lynne Kiorpes
    New York University
  • Marisa Carrasco
    New York University
  • Footnotes
    Acknowledgements  Funding: NIH R01-EY027401 to M.C.
Journal of Vision September 2024, Vol.24, 694. doi:https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.24.10.694
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Ekin Tünçok, Lynne Kiorpes, Marisa Carrasco; Motion discrimination around the visual field differs between adult humans and macaques. Journal of Vision 2024;24(10):694. https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.24.10.694.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

[Background and goal]. Visual discriminability varies with polar angle at isoeccentric locations. In human adults, performance is typically higher for stimuli along the horizontal than the vertical meridian (horizontal-vertical anisotropy, HVA), and along the lower than the upper vertical meridian (vertical meridian asymmetry, VMA). The macaque visual system is a prevalent animal model for understanding human vision. However, the natural-scene statistics may differ between these two species due to differences in bipedal locomotion and interactions with peri- and extra- personal space. Here we investigate whether polar angle asymmetries differ between adult human and macaque observers. [Method]. Adult macaque (n = 6) and human observers (n = 20) completed a 2AFC motion direction discrimination task at isoeccentric locations (7°) around the visual field. On every trial, a vertically-oriented Gabor target was presented (500 ms) among 7 equidistant distractors (Gabor patches with varying motion directions). Observers reported the motion direction of the target (left or right) whose location randomly varied among the 8 isoeccentric locations. [Results]. Performance was not homogenous as a function of polar angle for either observer group. Interestingly, the two groups of observers showed a striking difference in sensitivity (d’): For human observers, there was a pronounced VMA, a weaker HVA, and lower sensitivity at intercardinal than cardinal locations. For macaque observers, sensitivity was more homogenous as a function of polar angle, but was the poorest at the lower vertical meridian, showing an inverted VMA. [Conclusion]. The macaque visual system is used as an animal model to understand human vision, yet these two observer groups showed a pronounced difference in sensitivity around the visual field. The inverted VMA observed in macaques may reflect adaptive behavior by increasing discriminability at locations with greater relevance for visuomotor integration.

×
×

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.

×