<p>There is no difference between the two; illusionary movement and motion are interchangeable terms. For example, a definition of apparent <strong>motion</strong> is (<a href="http://oxfordindex.oup.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095419778" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Oxford Index</a>): </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>A sensation of <strong>movement</strong> in the absence of actual movement, [for example] visual illusions [...]</p>
</blockquote>

<p>And a definition for apparent <strong>movement</strong> (<a href="http://psychologydictionary.org/apparent-movement/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Psychology Dictionary</a>) is:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>[A]n illusion of <strong>motion</strong> or change of size that is cued by visual tricks.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>In other words, apparent movement and apparent motion are the same thing. The two visual illusions you provide, though, <em>are</em> caused by two different neurophysiological phenomena altogether. </p>

<p>The <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flip_book" rel="nofollow noreferrer">flip book</a> relies on <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistence_of_vision" rel="nofollow noreferrer">persistent vision</a> where multiple images are blurred into a coherent perception over time.      </p>

<p>The <a href="http://www.michaelbach.de/ot/mot-snakes/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">rotating spokes</a> illusion is thought to be caused by asymmetric luminance steps that trigger the motion detectors in the brain.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-02-03T09:10:37.890Z
2017-02-03T10:15:48.807Z
2017-02-03T10:15:48.807Z
AliceD
<p>A definition for <strong>apparent movement</strong> is:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The perception of movement produced by stimuli that are stationary but are presented first at one position and then, at an appropriate time interval, presented at a different position.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>Example:</strong></p>
<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/tyBb9.gif" rel="noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/tyBb9.gif" alt="enter image description here" /></a></p>
<hr />
<p>And <strong>apparent motion</strong> is defined as:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Motion can be detected even if there is no real motion</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>Example:</strong></p>
<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flip_book" rel="noreferrer">Flip Books</a></p>
<hr />
<p>Now to my actual <strong>question</strong>: I know that those two forms of perception are very close; so what is the actual difference between the two? Is there a pure definition of the difference?
I feel that both apparent movement and apparent motion are according to Gleitman et al. (2010) pretty much the same, and could be applied to both sorts of examples. So if presented with a stimulus/illusion, how would one approach them to discern which is which?</p>

<neuroscience><perception><vision><neurophysiology><optical-illusion>
What is the difference between apparent motion and apparent movement?
Ebbinghaus
# What is the difference between apparent motion and apparent movement?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2016-10-20)

A definition for **apparent movement** is:

> The perception of movement produced by stimuli that are stationary but are presented first at one position and then, at an appropriate time interval, presented at a different position.

**Example:**

[![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/tyBb9.gif)](https://i.sstatic.net/tyBb9.gif)

---

And **apparent motion** is defined as:

> Motion can be detected even if there is no real motion

**Example:**

[Flip Books](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flip_book)

---

Now to my actual **question**: I know that those two forms of perception are very close; so what is the actual difference between the two? Is there a pure definition of the difference?
I feel that both apparent movement and apparent motion are according to Gleitman et al. (2010) pretty much the same, and could be applied to both sorts of examples. So if presented with a stimulus/illusion, how would one approach them to discern which is which?

**Tags:** neuroscience, perception, vision, neurophysiology, optical-illusion


---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2017-02-03. Score: 3 | Accepted answer

There is no difference between the two; illusionary movement and motion are interchangeable terms. For example, a definition of apparent **motion** is ([Oxford Index](http://oxfordindex.oup.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095419778)):

> A sensation of **movement** in the absence of actual movement, [for example] visual illusions [...]

And a definition for apparent **movement** ([Psychology Dictionary](http://psychologydictionary.org/apparent-movement/)) is:

> [A]n illusion of **motion** or change of size that is cued by visual tricks.

In other words, apparent movement and apparent motion are the same thing. The two visual illusions you provide, though, *are* caused by two different neurophysiological phenomena altogether.

The [flip book](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flip_book) relies on [persistent vision](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistence_of_vision) where multiple images are blurred into a coherent perception over time.

The [rotating spokes](http://www.michaelbach.de/ot/mot-snakes/) illusion is thought to be caused by asymmetric luminance steps that trigger the motion detectors in the brain.


---

