Spatial Attention in Ponzo-like Patterns

Overview

Journal Percept Psychophys

Specialties Psychiatry
Psychology

Date 1992 Aug 1

PMID 1508628

Citations 8

Authors

A W Pressey

D Epp

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

A variant of Ponzo's pattern was devised by drawing converging oblique lines at the ends of each of two horizontal lines that were located directly one above the other. Pairs of converging or diverging fins (either between or outside the horizontal shafts) were systematically removed. The results showed that, as predicted by integrative field theory, oblique lines between the shafts produced more distortion than did oblique lines outside the shafts. Also, it was shown that the attentive field construct in integrative field theory was crucial for predicting patterns of means and variances in this experiment. The modified Ponzo effect was shown to have much in common with the classical Müller-Lyer illusion. The subtle differences between the two were explained by proposing that the size of the optimum attentive field was larger in the Ponzo tasks than in the Müller-Lyer tasks because expansion fins are found on both shafts in the Ponzo-like figure.

Citing Articles

Pictorial depth cues elicit the perception of tridimensionality in dogs.

Broseghini A, Stasek M, Looke M, Guerineau C, Marinelli L, Mongillo P Anim Cogn. 2024; 27(1):49.

PMID: 39037605 PMC: 11263462. DOI: 10.1007/s10071-024-01887-1.

An attentional approach to geometrical illusions.

Kirsch W, Kunde W Front Psychol. 2024; 15:1360160.

PMID: 38686092 PMC: 11056548. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1360160.

Effects of Color and Luminance Contrast on Size Perception-Evidence from a Horizontal Parallel Lines Illusion.

Zhang X, Qian J, Liang Q, Huang Z Vision (Basel). 2019; 2(3).

PMID: 31735891 PMC: 6835721. DOI: 10.3390/vision2030028.

Why do animals differ in their susceptibility to geometrical illusions?.

Feng L, Chouinard P, Howell T, Bennett P Psychon Bull Rev. 2016; 24(2):262-276.

PMID: 27488557 DOI: 10.3758/s13423-016-1133-3.

Illusory Distance Modulates Perceived Size of Afterimage despite the Disappearance of Depth Cues.

Qian J, Liu S, Lei Q PLoS One. 2016; 11(7):e0159228.

PMID: 27391335 PMC: 4938592. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0159228.

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, MARTIN N . The effects of varying fins in Müller-Lyer and Holding illusions. Psychol Res. 1990; 52(1):46-53. DOI: 10.1007/BF00867211. 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

Jaeger T . Contextual effects in the parallel lines illusion: some implications for assimilation theory. Percept Mot Skills. 1985; 61(3 Pt 2):1263-73. DOI: 10.2466/pms.1985.61.3f.1263. View

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

Pressey A, Kersten B . Attention and the Müller-Lyer illusion: simulation of an experiment by Larsen and Garn. Percept Mot Skills. 1989; 68(3 Pt 2):1323-9. DOI: 10.2466/pms.1989.68.3c.1323. View

Larsen J, Garn N . Wings in the intershaft space contribute to the Mueller-Lyer illusion. Percept Mot Skills. 1988; 67(3):831-4. DOI: 10.2466/pms.1988.67.3.831. View

Jordan K, English P . Simultaneous sampling and length contrast. Percept Psychophys. 1989; 46(6):546-54. DOI: 10.3758/bf03208151. View

Gregory R . DISTORTION OF VISUAL SPACE AS INAPPROPRIATE CONSTANCY SCALING. Nature. 1963; 199:678-80. DOI: 10.1038/199678a0. View

10.

Warren R, Bashford J . Müller-Lyer illusions: their origin in processes facilitating object recognition. Perception. 1977; 6(6):615-26. DOI: 10.1068/p060615. View

11.

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

12.

Reardon M, Parks T . The Ponzo illusion without suggested depth. Am J Psychol. 1983; 96(1):107-12. View

13.

McClellan P, Bernstein I, Garbin C . What makes the Mueller a liar: a multiple-cue approach. Percept Psychophys. 1984; 36(3):234-44. DOI: 10.3758/bf03206364. View

14.

Jordan K, Randall J . The effects of framing ratio and oblique length on Ponzo illusion magnitude. Percept Psychophys. 1987; 41(5):435-9. DOI: 10.3758/bf03203036. View

15.

TAUSCH R . [Optical illusions as artificial effects of size and shape figuration in natural spatial perception]. Psychol Forsch. 1954; 24(4):299-348. DOI: 10.1007/BF00422032. View

16.

Pressey A, Butchard N, Scrivner L . Assimilation theory and the Ponzo illusion: quantitative predictions. Can J Psychol. 1971; 25(6):486-97. DOI: 10.1037/h0082409. View

17.

Pressey A . Evidence for the role of attentive fields in the perception of illusions. Q J Exp Psychol. 1974; 26(Pt3):464-71. DOI: 10.1080/14640747408400435. View

18.

Pressey A . Effect of size of angle on the ambiguous Müller-Lyer illusion. Acta Psychol (Amst). 1974; 38(5):401-4. DOI: 10.1016/0001-6918(74)90043-2. View

19.

Pressey A, Pressey C . Attentive fields are related to focal and contextual features: a study of Müller-Lyer distortions. Percept Psychophys. 1992; 51(5):423-36. DOI: 10.3758/bf03211638. View

20.

Waite H, Massaro D . Test of Gregory's constancy scaling explanation of the Müller-Lyer illusion. Nature. 1970; 227(5259):733-4. DOI: 10.1038/227733a0. View