Motion discrimination around the visual field differs between adult humans and macaques

[Background and goal]. Visual discriminability varies with polar angle at isoeccentric locations. In human adults, performance is typically higher for stimuli along the horizontal than the vertical meridian (horizontal-vertical anisotropy, HVA), and along the lower than the upper vertical meridian (vertical meridian asymmetry, VMA). The macaque visual system is a prevalent animal model for understanding human vision. However, the natural-scene statistics may differ between these two species due to differences in bipedal locomotion and interactions with peri- and extra- personal space. Here we investigate whether polar angle asymmetries differ between adult human and macaque observers. [Method]. Adult macaque (n = 6) and human observers (n = 20) completed a 2AFC motion direction discrimination task at isoeccentric locations (7°) around the visual field. On every trial, a vertically-oriented Gabor target was presented (500 ms) among 7 equidistant distractors (Gabor patches with varying motion directions). Observers reported the motion direction of the target (left or right) whose location randomly varied among the 8 isoeccentric locations. [Results]. Performance was not homogenous as a function of polar angle for either observer group. Interestingly, the two groups of observers showed a striking difference in sensitivity (d’): For human observers, there was a pronounced VMA, a weaker HVA, and lower sensitivity at intercardinal than cardinal locations. For macaque observers, sensitivity was more homogenous as a function of polar angle, but was the poorest at the lower vertical meridian, showing an inverted VMA. [Conclusion]. The macaque visual system is used as an animal model to understand human vision, yet these two observer groups showed a pronounced difference in sensitivity around the visual field. The inverted VMA observed in macaques may reflect adaptive behavior by increasing discriminability at locations with greater relevance for visuomotor integration.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Vision
Published
2024-09-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.24.10.694
Primary Topic
Visual perception and processing mechanisms
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Motion discrimination around the visual field differs between adult humans and macaques

Lynne Kiorpes, Ekin Tünçok, Marisa Carrasco
Journal of Vision
Visual perception and processing mechanisms
article

Motion discrimination around the visual field differs between adult humans and macaques

Lynne Kiorpes, Ekin Tünçok, Marisa Carrasco
article en

Abstract

[Background and goal]. Visual discriminability varies with polar angle at isoeccentric locations. In human adults, performance is typically higher for stimuli along the horizontal than the vertical meridian (horizontal-vertical anisotropy, HVA), and along the lower than the upper vertical meridian (vertical meridian asymmetry, VMA). The macaque visual system is a prevalent animal model for understanding human vision. However, the natural-scene statistics may differ between these two species due to differences in bipedal locomotion and interactions with peri- and extra- personal space. Here we investigate whether polar angle asymmetries differ between adult human and macaque observers. [Method]. Adult macaque (n = 6) and human observers (n = 20) completed a 2AFC motion direction discrimination task at isoeccentric locations (7°) around the visual field. On every trial, a vertically-oriented Gabor target was presented (500 ms) among 7 equidistant distractors (Gabor patches with varying motion directions). Observers reported the motion direction of the target (left or right) whose location randomly varied among the 8 isoeccentric locations. [Results]. Performance was not homogenous as a function of polar angle for either observer group. Interestingly, the two groups of observers showed a striking difference in sensitivity (d’): For human observers, there was a pronounced VMA, a weaker HVA, and lower sensitivity at intercardinal than cardinal locations. For macaque observers, sensitivity was more homogenous as a function of polar angle, but was the poorest at the lower vertical meridian, showing an inverted VMA. [Conclusion]. The macaque visual system is used as an animal model to understand human vision, yet these two observer groups showed a pronounced difference in sensitivity around the visual field. The inverted VMA observed in macaques may reflect adaptive behavior by increasing discriminability at locations with greater relevance for visuomotor integration.

Journal of VisionVol. 24(10)
New York University (US)
Gender equality, Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 84%
Visual perception and processing mechanisms
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.