Framing Effects and the Reversed Müller-Lyer Illusion

Overview

Journal Percept Psychophys

Specialties Psychiatry
Psychology

Date 1992 Sep 1

PMID 1408641

Authors

J Predebon

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The enclosure hypothesis of the reversed Müller-Lyer illusion was examined in three experiments. In Experiment 1, the ingoing- and outgoing-wings forms of the illusion were measured separately, as a function of the size of the gap between the ends of the shaft and the apices of the wings. In Experiments 2 and 3, the effects of a square frame and of complete and amputated versions of a rectangle on the perceived length of an enclosed horizontal line were examined. For all non-Müller-Lyer illusion figures, an inverted U-shaped function describes the relationship between illusion magnitude and the length of the test line. The peak overestimation of the test line's length was obtained when the ratio of total figure length to test line length was about 3:2. Taken together, the results of the three experiments suggest that the reversed Müller-Lyer illusion can be explained within current theoretical frameworks, such as assimilation theory, without recourse to a special factor of enclosure.

References

Pressey A, Di Lollo V . Effects of distance between standard and comparison lines on the Müller-Lyer illusion. Percept Psychophys. 1978; 24(5):415-9. DOI: 10.3758/bf03199738. View

Pressey A, Smith N . The effects of location, orientation, and cumulation of boxes in the Baldwin illusion. Percept Psychophys. 1986; 40(5):344-50. DOI: 10.3758/bf03203026. View

FELLOWS B . The reverse Müller-Lyer illusion and "enclosure". Br J Psychol. 1968; 59(4):369-72. DOI: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1968.tb01151.x. View

Jordan K, Uhlarik J . Length contrast in the Müller-Lyer figure: functional equivalence of temporal and spatial separation. Percept Psychophys. 1986; 39(4):267-74. DOI: 10.3758/bf03204934. View

Pressey A, Di Lollo V, Tait R . Effects of gap size between shaft and fins and of angle of fins on the Müller--Lyer illusion. Perception. 1977; 6(4):435-9. DOI: 10.1068/p060435. View

KUNNAPAS T . Influence of frame size on apparent length of a line. J Exp Psychol. 1955; 50(3):168-70. View

Pressey A . A theory of the Mueller-Lyer illusion. Percept Mot Skills. 1967; 25(2):569-72. DOI: 10.2466/pms.1967.25.2.569. View

Pressey A . A comment on "The effects of framing ratio and oblique length on Ponzo illusion magnitude". Percept Psychophys. 1988; 43(2):201-2. DOI: 10.3758/bf03214199. View

Mack A, Heuer F, Villardi K, Chambers D . The dissociation of position and extent in Müller-Lyer figures. Percept Psychophys. 1985; 37(4):335-44. DOI: 10.3758/bf03211356. View

10.

Brigell M, Uhlarik J, Goldhorn P . Contextual influences on judgments of linear extent. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1977; 3(1):105-18. DOI: 10.1037//0096-1523.3.1.105. View

11.

FELLOWS B . Reversal of the Müller-Lyer illusion with changes in the length of the inter-fins line. Q J Exp Psychol. 1967; 19(3):208-14. DOI: 10.1080/14640746708400094. View

12.

Schiano D . Relative size and spatial separation: effects on the parallel-lines illusion. Percept Mot Skills. 1986; 63(3):1151-5. DOI: 10.2466/pms.1986.63.3.1151. View

13.

Predebon J . Illusion of extent in simple angular figures. Perception. 1983; 12(5):571-80. DOI: 10.1068/p120571. View

14.

Brigell M, Uhlarik J . The relational determination of length illusions and length aftereffects. Perception. 1979; 8(2):187-97. DOI: 10.1068/p080187. View

15.

Gillam B, Chambers D . Size and position are incongruous: measurements on the Müller-Lyer figure. Percept Psychophys. 1985; 37(6):549-56. DOI: 10.3758/bf03204921. View

16.

Worrall N, Firth D . The components of the standard and reverse Müller-Lyer illusions. Q J Exp Psychol. 1974; 26(Pt3):342-54. DOI: 10.1080/14640747408400423. View

17.

Kolbert J, Sarris V . Illusional effects of spatial distance between focal and contextual parts of a modified Müller-Lyer figure. Percept Mot Skills. 1984; 59(1):88-90. DOI: 10.2466/pms.1984.59.1.88. View