PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 11694081

Explaining lightness illusions.

P Bressan
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Grey looks darker when set against white than when set against black. In some complex figures this illusion becomes startling, and can be shown to depend on the perceptual organisation of regions within the image. The most widely accepted explanations of such effects are based on the analysis of the junctions formed where the boundaries of nearby regions meet. Even theories where junctions are not the subject of special concern underline their importance as grouping cues. In this paper I present several new families of figures that challenge both views, and conclude that junctions do not play any crucial role in lightness estimation.

Explore related subjects

Contrast SensitivityHumansLightingModels, PsychologicalOptical IllusionsPhotic StimulationJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

P Bressan. 2001. Explaining lightness illusions.. https://doi.org/10.1068/p3109

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2004

Contrast sensitivity to angular frequency gratings is not higher than to Cartesian gratings.

When contrast sensitivity functions to Cartesian and angular gratings were compared in previous studies the peak sensitivity to angular stimuli was reported to be 0.21 log units higher. In experiments carried out to repeat this result, we used the same two-alternative forced-choice paradigm, but improved experimental control and precision by increasing contrast resolution from 8 to 12 bits, increasing the screen refresh rate from 30 Hz interlaced to 85 Hz non-interlaced, linearizing the voltage-luminance relation, modulating luminance in frequencies that minimize pixel aliasing, and improving control of the subject's exposure to the stimuli. The contrast sensitivity functions to Cartesian and angular gratings were similar in form and peak sensitivity (2.4 cycles per visual degree (c/deg) and 32 c/360 degrees, respectively) to those reported in a previous study (3 c/deg and 32 c/360 degrees, respectively), but peak sensitivity to angular stimuli was 0.13 log units lower than that to Cartesian stimuli. When the experiment was repeated, this time simulating the experimental control level used in the previous study, no difference between the peak sensitivity to Cartesian and angular stimuli was found. This result agrees with most current models that assume Cartesian filtering at the first visual processing stage. The discrepancy in the results is explained in part by differences in the degree of experimental control.

Contrast Sensitivity↗
PubMed2004

Effects of contrast and size on orientation discrimination.

Motivated by the recent physiological finding that a neuron's receptive field can increase in size by a factor of 2-4-fold at low contrast [Nat. Neurosci. 2 (1999) 733, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 96 (1999) 12073], we sought to examine whether a psychophysical task might reflect the contrast dependent changes in the size/structure of a receptive field. We postulate that since spatial summation is not contrast invariant, a task that relies on the spatial structure of a receptive field, such as orientation discrimination, should also be affected by changes in contrast. Previously, orientation discrimination thresholds have been reported to be roughly independent of the contrast of a stimulus for most of the visible range of contrasts [i.e. J. Neurophysiol. 57 (1987) 773, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 6 (1989) 713, Vis. Res. 30 (1990) 449, Vis. Res. 39 (1999) 1631]. Here, we found large improvements in orientation discrimination with contrast that were dependent on stimulus area. Furthermore, the apparent constancy of orientation discrimination for large area stimuli is possibly a result of a floor effect on the threshold. Therefore we conclude that there is not strong evidence for contrast invariant orientation discrimination. We interpret these results in the context of recent neurophysiological results about the expansion of cortical cells' receptive fields at low contrast.

Contrast Sensitivity↗
PubMed2004

In search of an elusive hard threshold: a test of observer's ability to order sub-threshold stimuli.

The contrast transducer function (d' vs. contrast) for sine gratings was claimed to come up from some non-zero contrast value rather than from the origin. This implies that there is a point (a hard threshold) on the grating contrast axis below which observers could not distinguish between presentations containing gratings and those containing a homogeneous field. We studied the ability to order sub-threshold square wave gratings and found, to the contrary, that observers were able to do this no matter how low the contrasts. At the same time, the observers failed to order the sub-threshold gratings when they were of the same contrast. The latter is inconsistent with signal detection theory which predicts that an observer's judgements are based on the same ordered set of sensory states irrespective of whether the stimuli differ or are the same. On the other hand, these data can be reconciled with the notion of a threshold if the latter is thought of as a fuzzy rather than a sharp margin on the contrast axis.

Contrast Sensitivity↗