Centroid extraction and illusions of extent with different contextual flanks

• Autorzy: Bulatov A. , Bertulis A. , Bulatova N. , Loginovich Y.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

In the present study, a computational model of the automatic centroid extraction based on the processes of local integration of excitatory profiles in the visual pathways has been developed. The model predictions have been compared with the results of our psychophysical examination of the perceptual distortions of the spatial extent. In experiments, the subjects matched two spatial intervals flanked by one of the three types of the contextual objects: either the Müller-Lyer wings, or vertical stripes, or spot pairs. A good resemblance between the theoretical functions and dependencies of the illusions’ magnitudes on various spatial parameters of the stimuli has provided evidence that the effects caused by indirect positional coding via centroids are powerful enough to explain the phenomena of the geometric illusions investigated.

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis
• Rocznik: 2009
• Tom: 69
• Numer: 4
• Opis fizyczny: p.504–525,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Bulatov A.

• Institute of Biology, Kaunas University of Medicine, Kaunas, Lithuania

autor

Bertulis A.

• Institute of Biology, Kaunas University of Medicine, Kaunas, Lithuania

autor

Bulatova N.

• Institute of Biology, Kaunas University of Medicine, Kaunas, Lithuania

autor

Loginovich Y.

• Institute of Biology, Kaunas University of Medicine, Kaunas, Lithuania

Bibliografia

• Baldwin JM (1895) The effect of size-contrast upon judge­ments of position in the retinal field. Psychol Rev 2: 244-259.
• Bertulis A, Bulatov A, Bielevicius A (2008) Influence of distracter on perceived stimulus length and angle size. Psichologija (Vilnius) 38: 29-39.
• Bettencourt KC, Somers DC (2009) Effects of target enhancement and distractor suppression on multiple object tracking capacity. J Vision 7: 1-11.
• Brigell M, Uhlarik J, Goldhorn P (1977) Contextual influ­ences on judgements of linear extent. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 3: 105-118.
• Bulatov A, Bertulis A (2005a) Superimposition of illusory patterns with contrast variations. Acta Neurobiol Exp (Wars) 65: 51-60.
• Bulatov A, Bertulis A (2005b) Distracting effect in length matching. Acta Neurobiol Exp (Wars) 65: 265-269.
• Bulatov A, Bertulis A, Mickiene L (1997) Geometrical illu­sions: study and modelling. Biol Cybern 77: 395-406.
• Cavanagh P, Alvarez GA (2005) Tracking multiple targets with multifocal attention. Trends Cogn Sci 9: 349-354.
• Chiang C (1968) A new theory to explain geometrical illu­sions produced by crossing lines. Percept Psychophys 3: 174-176.
• Coren S, Hoening P (1972) Effect of non-target stimuli upon length of voluntary saccades. Percept Mot Skills 34: 499-508.
• Coren S, Girgus JS (1978) Seeing is Deceiving: The Psychology of Visual Illusions. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.
• Coren S (1986) An efferent component in the visual percep­tion of direction and extent. Physiol Rev 93: 391-410.
• Davies TN, Spencer J (1977) An explanation for the Müller- Lyer illusion. Percept Mot Skills 45: 219-224.
• Day RH (1972) Visual spatial illusions: A general explana­tion. Science 175: 1335-1340.
• DeLucia PR, Longmire SP, Kennish J (1994) Diamond- winged variants of the Muller-Lyer figure: A test of Virsu's (1971) centroid theory. Percept Psychophys 55: 287-295.
• Desimone R, Duncan J (1995) Neural mechanisms of selec­tive visual attention. Ann Rev Neurosci 18: 193-222.
• Earle DC, Maskell S (1993) Fraser cords and reversal of the café wall illusion. Perception 22: 383-390.
• Fermüller C, Malm H (2004) Uncertainty in visual processes predicts geometrical optical illusions. Vision Res 44: 727-749.
• Festinger L, White CW, Allyn MR (1968) Eye movements and decrement in the Muller-Lyer illusion. Percept Psychophys 3: 376-382.
• Fink GR, Marshall JC, Weiss PH, Toni I, Zilles K (2002) Task instructions influence the cognitive strategies involved in line bisection judgments: evidence from modulated neural mechanisms revealed by fMRI. Neuropsychologia 40: 119-130.
• Gandhi SP, Heeger DJ, Boynton GM (1999) Spatial atten­tion affects brain activity in human primary visual cortex. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 16: 3314-3319.
• Gillam B (1980) Geometrical illusions. Sci Am 242: 102-111.
• Gillam B (1998) Illusions at century's end. In: Perception and Cognition at Century's End (Hochberg J, Ed.). Academic Press, London, UK, p. 95-136.
• Ginsburg AP (1984) Visual form perception based on bio­logical filtering. In: Sensory Experience, Adaptation and Perception (Spilman L, Wooten GR, Eds.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, p. 53-72.
• Glass L (1970) Effect of blurring on perception of a simple geometrical pattern. Nature 228: 1341-1342.
• Gregory RL (1963) Distortion of visual space as inappropri­ate constancy scaling. Nature 119: 678.
• Gregory RL (1968) Visual illusions. Sci Am 219: 66-67.
• Howe CQ, Purves D (2005) The Muller-Lyer illusion explained by the statistics of image-source relationships. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102: 1234-1239.
• Intriligator J, Cavanagh P (2001) The spatial resolution of visual attention. Cogn Psychol 43: 171-216.
• Kaufman L, Richards W (1969) Spontaneous fixation ten­dencies for visual forms. Percept Psychophys 5: 85-88.
• Kelly SP, Gomez-Ramirez M, Foxe JJ (2008) Spatial atten­tion modulates initial afferent activity in human primary visual cortex. Cereb Cortex 18: 2629-2636.
• Levi DM, Klein SA, Aitsebaomo AP (1985) Vernier acuity, crowding, and cortical magnification. Vision Res 25: 963-977.
• Mack A, Heuer F, Villardi K, Chambers D (1985) The dis­sociation of position and extent in Muller-Lyer figures. Percept Psychophys 37: 335-344.
• McLaughlin SC, De Sisto MJ, Kelley MJ (1969) Comment on "Eye movement and decrement in the Muller-Lyer illusion". Percept Psychophys 5: 288.
• Morgan MJ, Aiba TS (1985) Vernier acuity predicted from changes in the light distribution of the retinal image. Spat Vis 1: 151-161.
• Morgan MJ (1999) The Poggendorf illusion: a bias in the estimation of the orientation of virtual lines by second- stage filters. Vision Res 39: 2361-2380.
• Morgan MJ, Casco C (1990) Spatial filtering and spatial primitives in early vision: An explanation of the Zöllner- Judd class of geometrical illusions. Proc Biol Sci 242: 1-10.
• Morgan MJ, Hole GJ, Glennerster A (1990) Biases and sen­sitivities in geometrical illusions. Vision Res 30: 1793­1810.
• Morinaga S (1941) Some considerations on the explanation of the Muller-Lyer illusion. Japanese Journal of Psychology 16: 26-39.
• Müller-Lyer FC (1896) Zur Lehre von den optischen Täuschungen über Kontrast und Konfluxion. Zeitschrift für Psychologie 9: 1-16.
• Nakayama K, Mackaben M (1989) Sustained and transient components of focal visual attention. Vis Res 29: 1631­1647.
• Posner MI, Petersen SE (1990) The attention system of the human brain. Ann Rev Neurosci 13: 25-42.
• Pressey AW, Pressey CA (1992) Attentive fields are related to focal and contextual features: A study of Müller-Lyer distortions. Percept Psychophys 51: 423-436.
• Restle F, Decker J (1977) Size of the Müller-Lyer illusion as a function of its dimensions: Theory and data. Percept Psychophys 21: 489-503.
• Robinson DL, Petersen SE (1992) The pulvinar and visual salience. Trends Neurosci 15: 127-132.
• Sagi D, Julesz B (1986) Enhanced detection in the aperture of focal attention during simple shape discrimination tasks. Nature 321: 693-695.
• Searleman A, Porac C, Brzuszkiewicz L (2003) Changing the strength of the horizontal/vertical illusion by alter­ing the placement of the functional fovea. Poster pre­sented at the Eastern Psychological Association, Baltimore, MD.
• Searleman A, Porac C, Sherman M (2004) Manipulating the strength of the Ponzo illusion by controlling the position of the functional fovea. Poster presented at the Eastern Psychological Association, Washington, DC.
• Searleman A, Porac C, Dafoe C, Hetzel B (2005) Altering Mueller-Lyer illusion magnitude using figural additions at the wing-shaft intersections. Am J Psychol 118: 619­637.
• Seizova-Cajic T, Gillam B (2006) Biases in judgments of separation and orientation elements belonging to different clusters. Vision Res 46: 2525-2534.
• Sierra-Vázquez V, Serano-Pedraza I (2007) Single-band amplitude demodulation of Müller-Lyer illusion images. Span J Psychol 10: 3-19.
• Solomon JA, Felisberti FM, Morgan MJ (2004) Crowding and the tilt illusion: Toward a unified account. J Vision 4: 500-508.
• Somers DC, Dale AM, Seiffert AE, Tootell RBH (1999) Functional MRI reveals spatially specific attentional modulation in human primary visual cortex. Neurobiology 96: 1663-1668.
• Tausch R (1954) Optische Taüschungen als artifizielle Effekte der Gestaltungs-prozesse von Grössen und Formenkonstanz in der natürlichen Raumwahrnehmung. Psychologische Forschung 24: 299-348.
• Toet A, Levi DM (1992) The two-dimensional shape of spa­tial interaction zones in the parafovea. Vision Res 32: 1349-1357.
• Virsu V (1971) Tendencies to eye movement, and misper- ception of curvature, direction, and length. Percept Psychophys 9: 65-72.
• Ward LM, Coren S (1976) The effect of optically induced blur on the magnitude of the Mueller-Lyer illusion. Bull Psychonom Soc 7: 483-484.
• Watt RJ, Morgan MJ (1983) The recognition and representa­tion of edge blur: Evidence for spatial primitives in vision. Vision Res 23: 1465-1477.
• Welch RB, Post RB, Lum W, Prinzmetal W (2004) The rela­tionship between perceived length and egocentric location in Muller-Lyer figures with one versus two chevrons. Percept Psychophys 66: 1095-1104.
• Westheimer G, McKee SP (1977) Spatial configurations for visual hyperacuity. Vision Res 17: 941-947.
• Worrall N, Firth D (1974) The components of the standard and reverse Muller-Lyer illusions. Quart J Exp Psychol 26: 342-354.
• Yarbus AL (1967) Eye Movements and Vision. Plenum Press, NY.

Uwagi

PL

Rekord w opracowaniu