FRAME-AND-SPOT-INDUCED MOTION - RANGE EFFECTS AND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FIXATION AND NONFIXATION OF THE INDUCED STIMULUS

Anthony Reinhardt-Rutland

FRAME-AND-SPOT-INDUCED MOTION - RANGE EFFECTS AND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FIXATION AND NONFIXATION OF THE INDUCED STIMULUS

Anthony Reinhardt-Rutland

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

For frame-and-spot-induced linear motion, Humber and Sherrick report that induced motion of a nonfixated static spot reduces as its separation from a fixated static spot increases. The authors invoke sensory factors, but range effects may undermine this interpretation.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	653-654
Journal	Perceptual and Motor Skills
Volume	76
Issue number	2
Publication status	Published (in print/issue) - Apr 1993

Cite this

@article{af34c3b3a0ed4245ab1b88411265c2bb,

title = "FRAME-AND-SPOT-INDUCED MOTION - RANGE EFFECTS AND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FIXATION AND NONFIXATION OF THE INDUCED STIMULUS",

abstract = "For frame-and-spot-induced linear motion, Humber and Sherrick report that induced motion of a nonfixated static spot reduces as its separation from a fixated static spot increases. The authors invoke sensory factors, but range effects may undermine this interpretation.",

author = "Anthony Reinhardt-Rutland",

year = "1993",

month = apr,

language = "English",

volume = "76",

pages = "653--654",

journal = "Perceptual and Motor Skills",

issn = "1558-688X",

publisher = "SAGE Publications",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - FRAME-AND-SPOT-INDUCED MOTION - RANGE EFFECTS AND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FIXATION AND NONFIXATION OF THE INDUCED STIMULUS

AU - Reinhardt-Rutland, Anthony

PY - 1993/4

Y1 - 1993/4

N2 - For frame-and-spot-induced linear motion, Humber and Sherrick report that induced motion of a nonfixated static spot reduces as its separation from a fixated static spot increases. The authors invoke sensory factors, but range effects may undermine this interpretation.

AB - For frame-and-spot-induced linear motion, Humber and Sherrick report that induced motion of a nonfixated static spot reduces as its separation from a fixated static spot increases. The authors invoke sensory factors, but range effects may undermine this interpretation.

M3 - Article

SN - 1558-688X

VL - 76

SP - 653

EP - 654

JO - Perceptual and Motor Skills

JF - Perceptual and Motor Skills

IS - 2

ER -

FRAME-AND-SPOT-INDUCED MOTION - RANGE EFFECTS AND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FIXATION AND NONFIXATION OF THE INDUCED STIMULUS

Abstract

Fingerprint

Cite this