↓ Skip to main content

The Role of Feature Tracking in the Furrow Illusion

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 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
The Role of Feature Tracking in the Furrow Illusion
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, March 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00081
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rémy Allard, Jocelyn Faubert

Abstract

In the furrow illusion (Anstis, 2012), the perceived path of a moving target follows the veridical path orientation when viewed foveally, but follows the orientation of the texture when viewed peripherally. These radically different motion percepts depending on whether the stimulus is viewed foveally or peripherally has led Anstis to conclude that the furrow illusion reveals "profound differences in the way that the periphery and fovea process visual motion." In the current study, we rather argue that the different percepts can be explained by reduced position acuity with eccentricity and therefore do not imply different ways of processing motion per se. If feature tracking, which is position-based, is involved in the perception of the veridical motion direction, then impairing the feature tracking motion system should strengthen the illusion. To reduce contribution of the feature tracking motion system, we used a crowding paradigm consisting in presenting many nearby targets. We found that under crowding conditions, the furrow illusion was stronger. We conclude that feature tracking was involved in the perception of the veridical motion direction, which is compatible with the hypothesis that the different motion percepts at fixation and in the periphery are due to a reduced position acuity with eccentricity affecting feature tracking, not to different ways of processing motion per se.

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 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Malaysia 1 5%
Unknown 18 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 26%
Student > Master 3 16%
Professor 3 16%
Researcher 2 11%
Lecturer 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 4 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 4 21%
Neuroscience 3 16%
Unspecified 1 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Other 3 16%
Unknown 6 32%
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 07 March 2016.
All research outputs
#20,313,158
of 22,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#6,548
of 7,163 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,368
of 298,965 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#149
of 159 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,854,458 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 7,163 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. 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 298,965 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 159 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.