Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Neural correlates of illusory line motion

Associated organisational unit

Electronic data

  • journal.pone.0087595

    Rights statement: Copyright: © 2014 Hamm et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

    Final published version, 1.9 MB, PDF document

    Available under license: CC BY

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Neural correlates of illusory line motion: fMRI of ILM

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Published
Close
<mark>Journal publication date</mark>27/01/2014
<mark>Journal</mark>PLoS ONE
Issue number1
Volume9
Number of pages11
Pages (from-to)1-11
Publication StatusPublished
<mark>Original language</mark>English

Abstract

Illusory line motion (ILM) refers to a motion illusion in which a flash at one end of a bar prior to the bar's instantaneous presentation or removal results in the percept of motion. While some theories attribute the origin of ILM to attention or early perceptual mechanisms, others have proposed that ILM results from impletion mechanisms that reinterpret the static bar as one in motion. The current functional magnetic resonance imaging study examined participants while they made decisions about the direction of motion in which a bar appeared to be removed. Preceding the instantaneous removal of the bar with a flash at one end resulted in a motion percept away from the flash. If this flash and the bar's removal overlapped in time, it appeared that the bar was removed towards the flash (reverse ILM). Independent of the motion type, brain responses indicated activations in areas associated with motion (MT+), endogenous and exogenous attention (intraparietal sulcus, frontal eye fields, and ventral frontal cortex), and response selection (ACC). ILM was associated with lower percept scores and higher activations in ACC relative to real motion, but no differences in shapeselective areas emerged. This pattern of brain activation is consistent with the attentional gradient model or bottom-up accounts of ILM in preference to impletion.

Bibliographic note

Copyright: © 2014 Hamm et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.