» Articles » PMID: 36723930

Underestimation of the Number of Hidden Objects

Overview
Journal J Vis
Specialty Ophthalmology
Date 2023 Feb 1
PMID 36723930
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The perceptual representation of our environment does not only involve what we actually can see, but also inferences about what is hidden from our sight. For example, in amodal completion, simple contours or surfaces are filled-in behind occluding objects allowing for a complete representation. This is important for many everyday tasks, such as visual search, foraging, and object handling. Although there is support for completion of simple patterns from behavioral and neurophysiological studies, it is unclear if these mechanisms extend to complex, irregular patterns. Here, we show that the number of hidden objects on partially occluded surfaces is underestimated. Observers did not consider accurately the number of visible objects and the proportion of occlusion to infer the number of hidden objects, although these quantities were perceived accurately and reliably. However, visible objects were not simply ignored: estimations of hidden objects increased when the visible objects formed a line across the occluder and decreased when the visible objects formed a line outside of the occluder. Confidence ratings for numerosity estimation were similar for fully visible and partially occluded surfaces. These results suggest that perceptual inferences about what is hidden in our environment can be very inaccurate und underestimate the complexity of the environment.

Citing Articles

Electroencephalographic Responses to the Number of Objects in Partially Occluded and Uncovered Scenes.

Baykan C, Schutz A J Cogn Neurosci. 2024; 37(1):227-238.

PMID: 39436218 PMC: 7617299. DOI: 10.1162/jocn_a_02264.


Implied occlusion and subset underestimation contribute to the weak-outnumber-strong numerosity illusion.

Dellinger E, Becker K, Durgin F J Vis. 2024; 24(11):14.

PMID: 39417755 PMC: 11498648. DOI: 10.1167/jov.24.11.14.

References
1.
Ramachandran V . Blind spots. Sci Am. 1992; 266(5):86-91. DOI: 10.1038/scientificamerican0592-86. View

2.
Nieder A, Freedman D, Miller E . Representation of the quantity of visual items in the primate prefrontal cortex. Science. 2002; 297(5587):1708-11. DOI: 10.1126/science.1072493. View

3.
Odegaard B, Chang M, Lau H, Cheung S . Inflation versus filling-in: why we feel we see more than we actually do in peripheral vision. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2018; 373(1755). PMC: 6074087. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2017.0345. View

4.
van Lier R, van der Helm P, Leeuwenberg E . Competing global and local completions in visual occlusion. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1995; 21(3):571-83. DOI: 10.1037//0096-1523.21.3.571. View

5.
de Leeuw J . jsPsych: a JavaScript library for creating behavioral experiments in a Web browser. Behav Res Methods. 2014; 47(1):1-12. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-014-0458-y. View