Interocular transfer of motion aftereffectsAn important phenomenon in the field of visual science is motion aftereffect (MAE), which is believed to provide a means of bringing together current knowledge. of neurophysiology with a measurable visual phenomenon. MAE is described as a visual illusion produced by viewing a number of types of movements (i.e., linear lateral or vertical, spiral, radial, or rotation). Looking at a physical object in motion for a period of time until the eyes adjust to the movement. When the movement of the object is stopped, but the visualization remains focused on the object, the viewer may report slower, reversed/negative movement of the now stationary object (Mather et al, 1998). The history of recognition and research on MAE This phenomenon dates back to Aristotelian times. Aristotle (330 BC) and Lucretius (about three centuries later) reported the visual phenomenon as an effect of the water stimulus (although Lucretius went further in describing an MAE direction). It was not until the beginning of the 19th century that more in-depth research was seen. Both Purkinje (1820) and Addams (1834) reported the causality and directional flow of the MAE by referring to cavalry parades and stunts as examples of respective movements. From this period until the mid-20th century, research was sporadic. This may be because so little was known about the neuroanatomy of the visual system. Wohlgemuth (1911), however, had reviewed many of the works of his predecessors and reported on several of his own studies. An important aspect of his research was the discovery of the storage effect of AEDs. After adaptation to the stimuli, the test eye is closed for the middle of paper...... between the viewing conditions and the adapted eye, although it can be seen that there is consistency with the reduction in the magnitude of the MAE from monocular to interocular tests.DiscussionThrough analysis of the results, it may initially appear that the experimental hypothesis is supported. Encoding category shows that there is no significant main effect between recall scores for visual and auditory encoding preference subjects. The learning and teaching method factor, however, shows that performance between the two groups has a very significant main effect at the 1% level. It is also evident from Table 2 and the profile plot in Figure 1 that there is a significant interaction (at the 5% level) between the visual and auditory coding groups in the imagery and sentence conditions. This in turn suggests that the experimental hypothesis cannot be fully accepted..