Motion Coherence and Luminance Effects

Motion coherency and Luminance EffectsJamie NourzadMotion Coherence and Luminance Effects on Visual Evoked PotentialsThe electroencephalogram (EEG) as described by David Eagleman and Jonathan Downar (2016), is a device designed to measure and enter brain wave patterns, and was originally designed for evaluating brain activity of epileptic and brain damaged patients (p. 312). The current mull is a replication of Kubova, Kuba, Spekreijse, and Blakemores 1995 study utilizing the EEG to measure the impressions of tackiness and luminance on exercise-onset optical evoked potentials (VEPs). The two self- allowing variables looked at in this study were motion coherence (100% coherent and 1% coherent), and luminance (dim vs bright). The hypotheses were (a.) coherence should affect the bounteousness of the N2 roseola specifically, that low coherence should result in a higher(prenominal) peak amplitude, and (b.) luminance (brightness) should affect the latency specifically, that low lu minance should embarrass the peak.MethodsParticipantsThe study participants were Kennesaw State University (KSU) student volunteers from three sections of PSYC 4410. Participants were offered course extra acknowledgement of 25 points to take part in the study. Student participants served as both subjects and research assistants. There was no selection criterion for the subjects. The participants serving as research assistants administered the electroencephalogram (EEG) on the subjects (n = 16) in Dr. Tim Martins lab at KSU, infra direct supervision of Dr. Martin.Recording and ProcedureVEPs were recorded with a 40-channel NuAmps amplifier with the carry set at 0.03 200 Hz, the sampling rate set at 500 Hz, and with linked earlobe reference. Participant subjects and research assistants met for scheduled sessions in Dr. Martins lab. Research assistants applied the EEG cap, gel, and electrodes to the subjects. Subjects were given instructions to look at computer generated stimuli 40 0 trials (100 per condition) of 500 moving dots (each 0.02 of visual angle in size). Stimuli were presented in viewing aperture 5 across. Duration was 500 ms, inter-trial interval 500-2000 ms randomly varied, using uniform distribution. The subjects were asked to perform small mechanical manipulations on the computer keyboard in resolution to the visual stimuli. The EEG data was impact by using a low pass filter at 45 Hz. The bad epochs were removed from the data, and all blink artifacts were removed with independent components analysis.ResultsResults successfully replicated earlier findings (Bach, M., Ullrich, D., 1997 Kubova et al., 1995) showing a clear effect of coherence for dim stimuli on amplitude, but there was no apparent effect of coherence for the bright stimuli. See envision 1.DiscussionAnalysis of VEPs serves as a tool in detecting various abnormalities that may call for the visual pathways, such as epilepsy and other brain dysfunctions. Implications of the results of this study support previous research providing evidence that there are various uneasy mechanisms involved in motion-related VEPs that expand beyond the primary visual mantle (Bach, M., Ullrich, D., 1997 Braddick, O.J., OBrien, J.M.D., Wattam-Bell, J., Atkinson, J., Hartley, T., Turner, R., 2001 Kubova et al., 1995). The hypotheses that low coherence would result in a higher N2 peak amplitude was confirmed. Potential confounders to the study would be research assistant inexperience, as well as the inability to control for both internal and outer noise, which could degrade the recordings (Jackson, A.F., Bolger, D.J., 2014).ReferencesBach, M., Ullrich, D. (1997). Contrast dependency of motion-onset and pattern-reversal VEPs Interaction of stimulus type, recording site, and response component. Vision Research, 37, 1845-1849.Braddick, O.J., OBrien, J.M.D., Wattam-Bell, J., Atkinson, J., Hartley, T., Turner, R. (2001). Brain areas sensitive to coherent visual motion. Perceptio n, 30, 61-72.Eagleman, D., Downar, J. (2015). Brain and style A Cognitive Neuroscience Perspective. Oxford University Press.Jackson, A.F., Bolger, D.J. (2014). The neurophysiological bases of EEG and EEG measurement A review for the rest of us. Psychophysiology, 51, 1061-1071.Kubova, Z., Kuba, M., Spekreijse, H., Blakemore, C. (1995). Contrast dependence of motion-onset and patter-reversal evoked potentials. Vision Research, 35, 197-205.Figure 1. Coherence for dim and bright stimulus on amplitude.