{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.014007782101167316, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.273170731707317, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Vection: The Contributions of Absolute and Relative Visual Motion

Inspection of a visual scene rotating about the vertical body axis induces a compelling sense of self rotation, or circular vection. Circular vection is suppressed by stationary objects seen beyond the moving display but not by stationary objects in the foreground. We hypothesised that stationary objects in the foreground facilitate vection because they introduce a relative-motion signal into what would otherwise be an absolute-motion signal. Vection latency and magnitude were measured with a full-field moving display and with stationary objects of various sizes and at various positions in the visual field. The results confirmed the hypothesis. Vection latency was longer when there were no stationary objects in view than when stationary objects were in view. The effect of stationary objects was particularly evident at low stimulus velocities. At low velocities a small stationary point significantly increased vection magnitude in spite of the fact that, at higher stimulus velocities and with other stationary objects in view, fixation on a stationary point, if anything, reduced vection. Changing the position of the stationary objects in the field of view did not affect vection latencies or magnitudes.