Journal of Vision Cover Image for Volume 25, Issue 5
April 2025
Volume 25, Issue 5
Open Access
Optica Fall Vision Meeting Abstract  |   April 2025
Contributed Talks I: A paradoxical misperception of relative motion at the fovea
Author Affiliations
  • Josephine C. D'Angelo
    University of California, Berkeley
  • Pavan Tiruveedhula
    University of California, Berkeley
  • Raymond J. Weber
    Montana State University
  • David W. Arathorn
    Montana State University
  • Austin Roorda
    University of California, Berkeley
Journal of Vision April 2025, Vol.25, 7. doi:https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.25.5.7
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Josephine C. D'Angelo, Pavan Tiruveedhula, Raymond J. Weber, David W. Arathorn, Austin Roorda; Contributed Talks I: A paradoxical misperception of relative motion at the fovea. Journal of Vision 2025;25(5):7. https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.25.5.7.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Images moving in a direction consistent with retinal slip appear stable even if that motion is amplified. This persists even in the presence of a world-fixed background, giving rise to a misperception of relative motion. This was previously explored 2° away from the line-of-sight. We asked: Does this phenomenon persist closer to the fovea? Would an image slipping with only a quarter of the retinal slip relative to a world-fixed image be perceived as stable? We implemented a novel method presenting: a fixation target and two circular images offset on either side horizontally by 0.43°, through an adaptive optics scanning light ophthalmoscope. The left image moved independently on a random walk and the right image moved contingent to retinal motion. Subjects adjusted the random walk image’s magnitude of motion until it appeared to match the retina-contingent image's motion, quantifying its perceived motion. We found a surprising discontinuity in the results: with background content present, images slipping consistent with the eye’s motion appeared stable, even if slipping with a quarter of the retinal slip, while images moving inconsistent with retinal motion appear to move. When all background content was removed, the perception of motion was entirely different. These results confirm that in the fovea, the visual system perceptually suppresses motion of images that move in directions consistent with retinal slip and that background content is crucial for this computation.

Footnotes
 Funding: NIH R01EY023591; NIH T32EY007043; Berkeley Center for Innovation in Vision and Optics
×
×

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.

×