Comparison of sensitivity to first- and second-order local motion in 5-year-olds and adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We compared sensitivity to first- versus second-order motion in 5-year-olds and adults tested with stimuli moving at slower (1.5 degrees s(-1)) and faster (6 degrees s(-1)) velocities. Amplitude modulation thresholds were measured for the discrimination of the direction of motion (up vs. down) for luminance-modulated (first-order) and contrast-modulated (second-order) horizontal sine-wave gratings. At the slower velocity (1.5 degrees s(-1)), the differences in threshold between 5-year-olds and adults were small but significant for both first- and second-order stimuli (0.02 and 0.05 log units worse than adults' thresholds, respectively). However, at the faster velocity (6 degrees s(-1)), the differences in threshold between the children and adults were 8 times greater for second-order motion than for first-order motion. Specifically, children's thresholds were 0.16 log units worse than those of adults for second-order motion compared to only 0.02 log units worse for first-order motion. The different pattern of results for first-order and second-order motion at the faster velocity (6 degrees s(-1)) is consistent with models positing different mechanisms for the two types of motion and suggests that those mechanisms mature at different rates.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".