z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Peripheral vision: Good for biological motion, bad for signal noise segregation?
Author(s) -
Benjamin Thompson,
Bruce C. Hansen,
Robert F. Hess,
Nikolaus F. Troje
Publication year - 2007
Publication title -
journal of vision
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.126
H-Index - 113
ISSN - 1534-7362
DOI - 10.1167/7.10.12
Subject(s) - biological motion , peripheral vision , motion (physics) , perception , noise (video) , motion perception , computer vision , signal (programming language) , artificial intelligence , computer science , structure from motion , peripheral , communication , neuroscience , psychology , image (mathematics) , programming language , operating system
Biological motion perception, having both evolutionary and social importance, is performed by the human visual system with a high degree of sensitivity. It is unclear whether peripheral vision has access to the specialized neural systems underlying biological motion perception; however, given the motion component, one would expect peripheral vision to be, if not specialized, at least highly accurate in perceiving biological motion. Here we show that the periphery can indeed perceive biological motion. However, the periphery suffers from an inability to detect biological motion signals when they are embedded in dynamic visual noise. We suggest that this peripheral deficit is not due to biological motion perception per se, but to signal/noise segregation.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom