Oppel-Kundt illusion balance

• Autorzy: Bertulis A. , Surkys T. , Bielevicius A.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Perceptual estimates of spatial dimensions of visual objects depend on their shape and surface attributes. The present psychophysical study emphasizes two main contributors to the Oppel‑Kundt illusion: the outline of the filled space and the mode of filling. In past experiments, both factors have been considered significant. Our experiments were performed by using combined stimuli of the Oppel‑Kundt figures and supplementary objects situated within the empty intervals of the figures. Line segments, empty and filled rectangles, blurred contours, and grey and color images were used for the supplementary stimuli role. The experimental data demonstrated an innate property of the objects to balance the illusion of distance if they were placed within the Oppel‑Kundt figure and to create an illusion of extent when compared with an empty space interval. Both the balance magnitude and the induced illusion strength varied depending on the objects’ spatial structure. The supplementary objects showed a tendency to differ from each other by their functional capacity and were ranked from lowest to highest: a line segment, a solid bar with a blurred outline, a contour of a rectangle, a solid fill rectangle, greyscale patterns, and color pictures. The experimental findings provided support for an explanation of the Oppel‑Kundt illusion in terms of the spatial‑temporal summation of excitations representing the object outline and surface attributes at the lower cortical levels of the visual system. Along with the facts already established in current literature, the experimental data gave rise to the assumption that any visual object could appear larger than its occupied area, and that the Oppel‑Kundt illusion could become a separate case in the common sensory phenomenon of object size illusion

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis
• Rocznik: 2019
• Tom: 79
• Numer: 4
• Opis fizyczny: p.399-412, fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Bertulis A.

• Institute of Research of Biological Systems and Genetics, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Kaunas, Lithuania

autor

Surkys T.

• Institute of Research of Biological Systems and Genetics, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Kaunas, Lithuania

autor

Bielevicius A.

• Institute of Research of Biological Systems and Genetics, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Kaunas, Lithuania

Bibliografia

• Adelson EN, Bergen JR (1991) The plenoptic function and the elements of early vision. In: Computational models of visual processing (Landy MS, Movshon JA Eds.), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, p. 3–20.
• Bar M, Biederman I (1999) Localizing the cortical region mediating visual awareness of object identity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 96: 1790–1793.
• Beck DM, Rees G, Frith CD, Lavie N (2001) Neural correlates of change detection and change blindness. Nat Neurosci 4: 645–650.
• Bertulis A, Surkys T, Bulatov A, Bielevicius A (2014) Temporal dynamics of the Oppel‑Kundt illusion compared to the Müller‑Lyer illusion. Acta Neurobiol Exp 74: 443–455.
• Bertulis A, Surkys T, Bielevicius A (2018) Summation of two illusions of extent. Acta Neurobiol Exp 78: 148–162.
• Biederman I, Ju G (1988) Surface versus edge‑based determinants of visual recognition. Cogn Psychol 20: 38–64.
• Breitmeyer BG (2007) Visual masking: Past accomplishments, present status, future developments. Adv Cogn Psychol 3: 9–20.
• Breitmeyer BG, Tapia E (2011) Roles of contour and surface processing in microgenesis of object perception and visual consciousness. Adv Cogn Psychol 7: 68–81.
• Bulatov A, Bertulis A, Mickiene L (1997) Geometrical illusions: study and modeling. Biol Cybern 77: 395–40.
• Bulatov A, Bulatova N, Surkys T, Mickiene  L (2017) An effect of continuous con‑textual filling in the filled‑space illusion. Acta Neurobiol Exp 77: 157–167.
• Bulatov A, Marma V, Bulatova N, Mickienė L (2019) The filled‑space illusion induced by a single‑dot distractor. Acta Neurobiol Exp 79: 39–52.
• Carver L, Meltzoff A, Dawson G (2006) Event‑related potential (ERP) indices of infants’ recognition of familiar and unfamiliar objects in two and three dimensions. Dev Sci 9: 51–62.
• Craven B J, Watt R J (1989) The use of fractal image statistics in the estimation of lateral spatial extent. Spat Vis 4: 223–239.
• Cutrone EK, Heeger DJ, Carrasco M (2018) On spatial attention and its field size on the repulsion effect. J Vis 18: 8.
• Dehaene S, Naccache N, Cohen L, Le Bihan D, Mangin JF, Poline JB, Riviere D (2001) Cerebral mechanisms of word masking and unconscious repetition priming. Nat Neurosci 4: 752–758.
• Erdfelder E, Faul F (1994) A class of information integration models for the Oppel‑Kundt illusion (in German). Z Psychol Z Angew Psychol 202: 133–160.
• Ericsson ES (1970) A field theory of visual illusions. Br J Psychol 61: 451–466.
• Fabre‑Thorpe M, Richard G, Thorpe S J (1998) Rapid categorization of natural images by rhesus monkeys. Neuroreport 9: 303–308.
• Fisher C (2018) The temporal dynamics of size perception in adults and children. PhD Thesis University of East Anglia in Norwich, England, UK. https: //ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/68135/1/CarmenFisher_PhDThesis_2018_ FinalCopyPrint.pdf. Gibson JJ (1950) The perception of the visual world. Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA. Giora E, Gori S (2010) The perceptual expansion of a filled area depends on textural characteristics. Vis Res 50: 2466–2475.
• Grossberg S (1994) 3‑D vision and figure‑ground separation by visual cortex. Percept Psychophys: 55: 48–120.
• Helmholtz H (1867) Handbuch der physiologischen Optik. Leipzig, Germany: Barth. Helmholtz H (1867) Treatise on Physiological Optics. Vol. 3. New York: Dover; 1867/1962. 1962.
• English translation by J P C Southall for the Optical Society of America (1925) from the 3rd German edition of Handbuch der physiologischen Optik (first published in Leipzig: Voss). Hering E (1861) Contribution to Physiology Vol 1 (in German). Klein BP, Harvey BM, Dumoulin SO (2014) Attraction of position preference by spatial attention throughout human visual cortex. Neuron 84: 227–237.
• Knox H, Watanabe R (1894) On the quantitative determination of an optical illusion. Am J Psychol 6: 413–421, 509–514.
• Kundt A (1863) Untersuchungen über Augenmaass und optische Täuschungen [Investigations on visual estimation and optical illusions.]. Annalen der Physik und Chemie 120: 118–158.
• Lewis EO (1912) The illusion of filled space. Brit J Psychol 5: 36–50.
• Livingstone MS, Hubel DH (1987) Psychophysical evidence for separate channels for the perception of form color, movement, and depth. J Neurosci 7: 3416–3468.
• Livingstone MS, Hubel D H (1988) Segregation of form, color, movement, and depth: Anatomy, physiology, and perception. Science 240: 740–749.
• Lumer ED, Friston KJ, Rees G (1998) Neural correlates of perceptual rivalry in the human brain. Science 280: 1930–1934.
• Long B, Konkle T (2017) A familiar‑size Stroop effect in the absence of basic‑level recognition. Cognition 168: 234–242.
• Makovski T (2017) The open‑object illusion: size perception is greatly influenced by object boundaries. Atten Percept Psychophys 79: 1282–1289.
• Marr D (1982) Vision: A Computational Investigation into the Human Representation and Processing of Visual Information. Henry Holt and Company. san Francisco: w. h. Freeman. Messer H (1876) Notiz über die Vergleichung von Distanzen nach Augenmaas. Annalen der Physic und Chemie 233: 172–175.
• Mikellidou K (2012) Illusions of filled extent: psychophysics and neuroimaging methods [PhD Thesis]. University of York, New York, NY. Mikellidou K, Thompson P (2014) Crossing the line: estimations of line length in the Oppel‑Kundt illusion. J Vis 14: 20.
• Noguchi K, Hilz R, Rentschler I (1990) The effect of grouping of adjacent contours on the Oppel‑Kundt illusion (in Japanese). Jpn J Psychol Sci 8: 57–60.
• Obonai T (1933) Contributions to the study of psychophysical induction: III. Experiments on the illusions of field space. Jap J Psychol 8: 699–720
• Oppel, JJ (1855) Ueber geometrisch‑optische Täuschungen [On geometrical‑optical illusions]. Jahresbericht des physikalischen Vereins zu Frankfurt am Main, 1854–1855, 37–47.
• Piaget J (1969) The mechanisms of perception. New York. Basic Books. Piaget J, Osterrieth PA (1953) Research on the development of perceptions: XVIII The evolution of the Oppel‑Kundt illusion as a function of age (in French). Archives de Psychologie 34: 1–34.
• Peissig JJ, Singer J, Kawasaki K, Sheinberg DL (2007) Effects of long‑term object familiarity on event‑related potentials in the monkey. Cerebral Cortex 17: 1323–1334.
• Rousselet GA, Fabre‑Thorpe  M, Thorpe SJ (2002) Parallel processing in high‑level categorization of natural images. Nat Neurosci 5: 629–630.
• Russo G, Dellantonnio A (1989) Influence of phenomenal time on perceived space. Percept Mot Skills 68: 971–984.
• Sanford EC (1903) A course in experimental Psychology. Boston: Health. Shim WM, Cavanagh P (2005) Attentive tracking shifts the perceived location of a nearby flash. Vision Res 45: 3253–3261.
• Spiegel HG (1937) On the influence of the intermediate field on visually assessed distances (in German). Psychol Forsch 21: 327–383.
• Suzuki S, Cavanagh P (1997) Focused attention distorts visual space: An attentional repulsion effect. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 23: 443–463.
• Tausch R (1954) Optical illusions as artifacts of forming processes based on size and form constancy in natural space perception (in German). Psychol Forsch 24: 299–348.
• Thorpe SJ, Fize D, Marlot C (1996) Speed of processing in the human visual system. Nature 381: 520–522.
• VanRullen R (2007) The power of the feed‑forward sweep. Adv Cogn Psychol 3: 167–176. VanRullen R, Thorpe S J (2001) Is it a bird? Is it a plane? Ultra‑rapid visual categorisation of natural and artifactual objects. Perception 30: 655–668.
• Verrillo RT, Graeff CK (1970) The influence of surface complexity on judgments on area. Percept Psychophyss 7: 289–290.
• Wade NJ, Todorovic D, Phillip D, Lingelbach B (2017) Johann Joseph Oppel (1855) on geometrical–optical illusions: A translation and commentary. Iperception 8: 2041669517712724.
• Wackermann J, Kastner K (2009) Paradoxical form of filled/empty optical illusion. Acta Neurobiol Exp 69: 560–563.
• Wackermann J, Kastner K (2010) Determinants of filled/empty optical illusion: search for the locus of maximal effect. Acta Neurobiol Exp 70: 423–434.
• Wackermann J (2012) Determinants of filled/empty optical illusion: Differential effects of pattering. Acta Neurobiol Exp 72: 89–94.
• Wackermann J (2017) The Oppel‑Kundt illusion. In: The Oxford compendium of visual illusions (Shapiro AG, Todorovic´ D, Eds.). Oxford University Press, New York, p. 303–307).
• Watt RJ (1990) The primal sketch in human vision. In: AI and the Eye (Blake  A, Troscianko T, Eds). J Wiley and Sons, New York, USA. p. 147–180.
• Weidner R, Fink GR (2007) The neural mechanisms underlying the Müller‑Lyer illusion and its interaction with visuospatial judgments. Cereb Cortex 17: 878– 884.
• Wundt W (1898) The geometric–optical illusions (in German). Abh Königl Sächs Gesellsch Wiss 24: 55–178.
• Zhang J, Tan T (2002) Brief review of invariant texture analysis methods. Pattern Recognition 35: 735–747.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.21307/ane‑2019‑037