Abstract
Contrary to an earlier report [ Anstis and Gregory, Q. Jl exp. Psychol. 17, 173–174 (1965) ], we find that the sustained retinal motion caused by tracking a moving target over a stationary grating does not result in a motion aftereffect (MAE) which is equivalent to that resulting from comparable retinal motion caused by actual motion of a grating. The MAE associated with tracking generally occurs in elements falling on areas not previously exposed to retinal motion. It is in the same direction as the previous retinal motion in the display and is apparently an induced MAE caused by a weak, below threshold MAE in the elements stimulating areas that were previously exposed to retinal motion. Based on an analysis of eye movement records, we do not believe that the weakness of the tracking MAE is primarily a function of the poor quality of the tracking eye movements. Other possible reasons for the weakness of the MAE are suggested.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
