Is the resemblance of this limit on smooth pursuit of a sinusoidally oscillating target to the *attentional* tracking speed limit of 2 rps coincidental? From Fuchs (1967). Periodic eye tracking in the monkey. Journal of physiology, 193, 161–171.
Figure 7. Performance vs. resource functions. Performance increases with resource available per target, yielding for example higher percent correct for the one target condition (100% resource per target) than the two target condition (50% resource per target). The capacity-one model for the two target condition is that participants only track one target and ignore the other. The resulting level of performance for the two-target condition (green dot) is halfway between chance and the one target performance level. A linear resource vs. performance function makes the same prediction. Empirically, at high speeds performance was worse than these predictions (Figure 6), implying that the actual performance vs. resource function falls below the linear function. From Holcombe & Chen (submitted)
1908 photo of Ottmar Dittrich, Wilhelm Wirth (subject), Wilhelm Wundt, Otto Klemm, Friedrich Sander. Photograph provided by the University of Leipzig, found by Lars T. Boenke. Otto Klemm wrote a great paper on temporal order judgments between parts of the body, “Über die Wirksamkeit kleinster Zeitunterschiede auf dem Gebiete des Tastsinns” which Alex Holcombe discusses extensively in The temporal organisation of perception. In The Oxford Handbook of Perceptual Organisation. Wagemans, J., ed. Compare the attire of perception lab heads 100 years ago to what they wear now (see previous post)