↓ Skip to main content

Differential responses in dorsal visual cortex to motion and disparity depth cues

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Differential responses in dorsal visual cortex to motion and disparity depth cues
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00815
Pubmed ID
Authors

David M. Arnoldussen, Jeroen Goossens, Albert V. van den Berg

Abstract

We investigated how interactions between monocular motion parallax and binocular cues to depth vary in human motion areas for wide-field visual motion stimuli (110 × 100°). We used fMRI with an extensive 2 × 3 × 2 factorial blocked design in which we combined two types of self-motion (translational motion and translational + rotational motion), with three categories of motion inflicted by the degree of noise (self-motion, distorted self-motion, and multiple object-motion), and two different view modes of the flow patterns (stereo and synoptic viewing). Interactions between disparity and motion category revealed distinct contributions to self- and object-motion processing in 3D. For cortical areas V6 and CSv, but not the anterior part of MT(+) with bilateral visual responsiveness (MT(+)/b), we found a disparity-dependent effect of rotational flow and noise: When self-motion perception was degraded by adding rotational flow and moderate levels of noise, the BOLD responses were reduced compared with translational self-motion alone, but this reduction was cancelled by adding stereo information which also rescued the subject's self-motion percept. At high noise levels, when the self-motion percept gave way to a swarm of moving objects, the BOLD signal strongly increased compared to self-motion in areas MT(+)/b and V6, but only for stereo in the latter. BOLD response did not increase for either view mode in CSv. These different response patterns indicate different contributions of areas V6, MT(+)/b, and CSv to the processing of self-motion perception and the processing of multiple independent motions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Belgium 1 3%
Canada 1 3%
Unknown 30 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 27%
Researcher 7 21%
Student > Master 5 15%
Other 3 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 9%
Other 6 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 9 27%
Linguistics 5 15%
Engineering 5 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 12%
Neuroscience 3 9%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 2 6%
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 02 December 2013.
All research outputs
#17,702,587
of 22,729,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#5,697
of 7,134 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,222
of 280,769 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#727
of 862 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,729,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,134 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 280,769 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 862 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.