Differential activation solution to the

The correspondence problem arises in motion perception when more than one motion path is possible for discontinuously presented visual elements. Ullman’s (1979) “minimal mapping” solution to the correspondence problem, for which costs are assigned to competing motion paths on the basis of element affinities (e.g., greater affinity for elements that are closer together), is distinguished from a solution based on the differential activation of directionally selective motion detectors. The differential activation account was supported by evidence that path length affects detector activation in a paradigm for which motion correspondence is not a factor. Effects on detector activation in this paradigm also were the basis for the successful prediction of path luminance effects on solutions to the motion correspondence problem. Finally, the differential activation account was distinguished from minimal mapping theory by an experiment showing that the perception of an element moving simultaneously in two directions does not depend on whether the two motions are matched in path-length determined affinity; it is sufficient that the activation of detectors responding to each of the two motion directions is above the threshold level required for the motions to be perceived. Implications of the differential activation solution are discussed for the stability of perceived motions once they are established, and the adaptation of perceived andunperceived motions.