Welcome to the upgraded MacSphere! We're putting the finishing touches on it; if you notice anything amiss, email macsphere@mcmaster.ca

The Development of Sensitivity to First-and Second-order Local Motion

dc.contributor.advisorLewis, T.L.
dc.contributor.advisorMaurer, D.
dc.contributor.authorArmstrong, Vickie
dc.contributor.departmentPsychologyen_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-06-19T16:54:34Z
dc.date.available2014-06-19T16:54:34Z
dc.date.issued2009-05
dc.description.abstractThe purpose of this thesis is to determine the timeline of the development of sensitivity to first-order (luminance-defined) versus second-order (contrast-defined) motion and to compare how sensitivity to motion varies with temporal frequency (flicker rate), spatial frequency (stripe size), and velocity. In Chapter 2, I demonstrate that infants' sensitivity to drifting gratings is more adult-like for second-order than first-order stimuli. Moreover, the evidence suggests that infants choose a moving over a stationary grating based on their sensitivity to grating flicker rather than its direction. In Chapter 3, I demonstrate that sensitivity to second-order motion is more adult-like than sensitivity to first-order motion at all ages tested. Children reach adult-like levels of sensitivity to motion at 7 years when stimuli are second-order, but are still worse than adults at 10 years when stimuli are first-order. Furthermore, sensitivity to motion varies with temporal frequency when stimuli are first-order, but spatial frequency when stimuli are second-order. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that first-order motion is processed using low-level motion mechanisms, while second-order motion is processed using a feature tracking mechanism. In Chapter 4, I explored sensitivity to second-order motion in 5-year-olds and adults using directional and non-directional motion tasks. Children's sensitivity to motion is more immature when temporal frequency is relatively low, but only for the directional motion tasks. All participants perform better on the non-directional than the directional task, but only when temporal frequency is relatively high. These results are consistent with Seiffert and Cavanagh's (1998) findings that second-order motion is processed by a feature tracking mechanism. Combined, these findings are consistent with the idea that first-and second-order motion are processed, at least in part, by different neural mechanisms.en_US
dc.description.degreeDoctor of Philosophy (PhD)en_US
dc.description.degreetypeThesisen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11375/15363
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.subjectPsychologyen_US
dc.subjectNeuroscienceen_US
dc.titleThe Development of Sensitivity to First-and Second-order Local Motionen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Armstrong Vickie.pdf
Size:
6.56 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.68 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: