↓ Skip to main content

Perception of complex motion in humans and pigeons (Columba livia)

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental Brain Research, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
Title
Perception of complex motion in humans and pigeons (Columba livia)
Published in
Experimental Brain Research, February 2014
DOI 10.1007/s00221-014-3876-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jean-François Nankoo, Christopher R. Madan, Marcia L. Spetch, Douglas R. Wylie

Abstract

In the primate visual system, local motion signals are pooled to create a global motion percept. Like primates, many birds are highly dependent on vision for their survival, yet relatively little is known about motion perception in birds. We used random-dot stimuli to investigate pigeons' ability to detect complex motion (radial, rotation, and spiral) compared to humans. Our human participants had a significantly lower threshold for rotational and radial motion when compared to spiral motion. The data from the pigeons, however, showed that the pigeons were most sensitive to rotational motion and least sensitive to radial motion, while sensitivity for spiral motion was intermediate. We followed up the pigeon results with an investigation of the effect of display aperture shape for rotational motion and velocity gradient for radial motion. We found no effect of shape of the aperture on thresholds, but did observe that radial motion containing accelerating dots improved thresholds. However, this improvement did not reach the thresholds levels observed for rotational motion. In sum, our experiments demonstrate that the pooling mechanism in the pigeon motion system is most efficient for rotation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Portugal 1 3%
Unknown 28 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 23%
Researcher 6 20%
Student > Master 5 17%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 10%
Student > Postgraduate 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 5 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 23%
Psychology 7 23%
Neuroscience 5 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 7%
Engineering 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 5 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 February 2014.
All research outputs
#20,221,866
of 22,745,803 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#2,905
of 3,220 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,810
of 221,189 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#55
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,745,803 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,220 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 221,189 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.