Ternus effect: two processes or differential activation? Comments on Odic and Pratt's 2008 paper.
Using a bistable apparent-motion display, Odic and Pratt (2008, Perception 37 1790-1804) have recently presented data that they interpret as being inconsistent with what they call "the two-process theory". Instead, they argue, their data can be explained by the differential-activation theory along with a process they identify as "temporal summation of contrast". It is argued here that Odic and Pratt misinterpreted the two-process distinction and used a display that was too unusual to be adequately addressed by it. Further, their use of the differential-activation theory and, in particular, the temporal summation of contrast, seems problematic. It is concluded that there is little in their data and theoretical interpretation to justify rejection of the two-process approach.
Petersik
J Timothy
JT
Department of Psychology, Ripon College, PO Box 248, Ripon, WI 54971, USA. petersikt@ripon.edu
D006801:Humans; D009039:Motion Perception / Q000502:physiology*; D009903:Optical Illusions / Q000502:physiology*; D010775:Photic Stimulation / Q000379:methods; D011581:Psychological Tests