Failure to replicate the Aubert-Fleischl effect

For many years the accepted wisdom in vision science has been that humans tend to underestimate the speed of an object when they pursue it with their gaze in comparison to when they fixate a spot in the visual scene and the object moves across the retina, an effect that is referred to as the Aubert-Fleischl phenomenon. However, experiments on the Aubert-Fleischl effect have generally employed a target moving in front of a blank background. For objects moving in the real world, relative motion between the object and the background provides additional cues, potentially allowing the visual system to compensate for the Aubert-Fleischl phenomenon. To test this hypothesis, we asked 50 participants to compare the speed of a single sphere to the speed of a sphere-cloud in a two-interval forced-choice task while they either followed the single sphere with their gaze or kept their eyes on a fixation cross. Stimuli were presented in virtual reality and the sphere's movement could occur either in a completely black environment with no relative motion cues present, or against a visible, textured background behind the moving sphere. The probe sphere-cloud always moved in front of the same background as the target. We found no evidence for an Aubert-Fleischl effect, i.e., no evidence for an underestimation of speed during pursuit relative to fixation, in either of the environments. Our results challenge the prevailing notion that object speed is underestimated when the object is pursued versus when fixation is maintained and highlights the necessity to take into account characteristics of the visual scene when it comes to the Aubert-Fleischl effect.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PLoS ONE
Published
2025-12-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0324420
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

Failure to replicate the Aubert-Fleischl effect

Björn Jörges, Laurence R. Harris
PLoS ONE
Visual perception and processing mechanisms
article

Failure to replicate the Aubert-Fleischl effect

Björn Jörges, Laurence R. Harris
article en

Abstract

For many years the accepted wisdom in vision science has been that humans tend to underestimate the speed of an object when they pursue it with their gaze in comparison to when they fixate a spot in the visual scene and the object moves across the retina, an effect that is referred to as the Aubert-Fleischl phenomenon. However, experiments on the Aubert-Fleischl effect have generally employed a target moving in front of a blank background. For objects moving in the real world, relative motion between the object and the background provides additional cues, potentially allowing the visual system to compensate for the Aubert-Fleischl phenomenon. To test this hypothesis, we asked 50 participants to compare the speed of a single sphere to the speed of a sphere-cloud in a two-interval forced-choice task while they either followed the single sphere with their gaze or kept their eyes on a fixation cross. Stimuli were presented in virtual reality and the sphere's movement could occur either in a completely black environment with no relative motion cues present, or against a visible, textured background behind the moving sphere. The probe sphere-cloud always moved in front of the same background as the target. We found no evidence for an Aubert-Fleischl effect, i.e., no evidence for an underestimation of speed during pursuit relative to fixation, in either of the environments. Our results challenge the prevailing notion that object speed is underestimated when the object is pursued versus when fixation is maintained and highlights the necessity to take into account characteristics of the visual scene when it comes to the Aubert-Fleischl effect.

PLoS ONEVol. 20(12)
York University (CA)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 32%
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.