Direction-Specific Tilt Illusion: With and without Gaze Fixation

Perception ◽  
1982 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 529-533 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thom Carney
Keyword(s):  
Lateral Inhibition ◽  
Tilt Aftereffect ◽  
Tilt Illusion ◽  
Gaze Fixation ◽  
Test Grating

The perceived orientation of a test grating is rotated from its veridical orientation if an annulus grating with a similar orientation is present. The magnitude of this misperception was measured and found to be greater when the two gratings moved in the same direction than when they moved in opposite directions. This demonstration of a direction-specific tilt illusion is similar to the previously demonstrated direction-specific tilt aftereffect—which is to be expected if similar mechanisms are responsible for both phenomena. If the tilt illusion is caused by lateral inhibition between orientation-selective units, then these findings indicate that such inhibition is principally between units with similar orientation and direction of motion selectivities.

Stages of Orientation Coding Assessed by the Tilt Aftereffect

Perception ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 26 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 70-70
Author(s):  
R Anderson ◽  
M A Georgeson
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Frequency ◽  
Frequency Tuning ◽  
Broad Band ◽  
Tilt Aftereffect ◽  
Staircase Procedure ◽  
Test Grating ◽  
Spatial Frequency Tuning ◽  
Adaptation Condition ◽  
Parallel Condition

We investigated orientation coding via the spatial-frequency tuning of the tilt aftereffect (TAE). In the single-adaptation condition, subjects adapted to single gratings of 1 or 8 cycles deg−1, 40% contrast, tilted 15° clockwise or anticlockwise from vertical; in two double-adaptation conditions the 1 and 8 cycles deg−1 gratings were superimposed at opposite orientations (‘plaid’ condition) or at the same orientation (‘parallel’ condition). Test gratings of 1, 2, 4, and 8 cycles deg−1, 20% contrast, were presented for 150 ms in an interleaved staircase procedure that measured the TAE by nulling it, hence making a tilted test grating appear vertical. Initial adaptation was for 3 min, topped up for 2 s between test presentations. Results from the single-grating condition indicated broad spatial-frequency tuning of the TAE, since the effect was still strong when tested three octaves away from the adapter. In the parallel condition, the TAEs were around the average of those reported in the single condition. Negligible TAEs were found in the 1+8 cycles deg−1 plaid condition, indicating that opposing adaptations had effectively cancelled each other out. These findings strengthen the suggestion of Olzak and Thomas (1992 Vision Research32 1885 – 1898) that orientation is encoded via an integrative mechanism which pools or sums the outputs of different spatial-frequency channels, and further imply that much of the adaptation responsible for the TAE occurs at this later broad-band stage.

Linear summation of tilt illusion and tilt aftereffect

1980 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Svein Magnussen ◽  
Wolfgang Kurtenbach
Keyword(s):  
Tilt Aftereffect ◽  
Linear Summation ◽  
Tilt Illusion

scholarly journals Stochastic re-calibration: contextual effects on perceived tilt

2006 ◽  
Vol 273 (1601) ◽  
pp. 2681-2686 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua A Solomon ◽  
Michael J Morgan
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Visual System ◽  
Lateral Inhibition ◽  
Human Visual System ◽  
Contextual Effects ◽  
Letter Recognition ◽  
Tilt Illusion ◽  
Reference Orientation ◽  
The Difference

The human visual system exaggerates the difference between the tilts of adjacent lines or grating patches. In addition to this tilt illusion, we found that oblique flanks reduced acuity for small changes of tilt in the centre of the visual field. However, no flanks—regardless of their tilts—decreased sensitivity to contrast. Thus, the foveal tilt illusion should not be attributed to orientation-selective lateral inhibition. Nor is it similar to conventional crowding, which typically does not impair letter recognition in the fovea. Our observers behaved as though the reference orientation (horizontal) had a small tilt in the direction of the flanks. We suggest that the extent of this re-calibration varies randomly over trials, and we demonstrate that this stochastic re-calibration can explain flank-induced acuity loss in the fovea.

scholarly journals Interaction of contexts in context-dependent orientation estimation

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ron Dekel ◽  
Dov Sagi
Keyword(s):  
Visual Processing ◽  
Combined Effect ◽  
List Type ◽  
Contextual Influences ◽  
Tilt Aftereffect ◽  
Tilt Illusion ◽  
Contextual Influence ◽  
Non Linear ◽  
Selection For ◽  
Visual History

AbstractThe processing of a visual stimulus is known to be influenced by the statistics in recent visual history and by the stimulus’ visual surround. Such contextual influences lead to perceptually salient phenomena, such as the tilt aftereffect and the tilt illusion. Despite much research on the influence of an isolated context, it is not clear how multiple, possibly competing sources of contextual influence interact. Here, using psychophysical methods, we compared the combined influence of multiple contexts to the sum of the isolated context influences. The results showed large deviations from linear additivity for adjacent or overlapping contexts, and remarkably, clear additivity when the contexts were sufficiently separated. Specifically, for adjacent or overlapping contexts, the combined effect was often lower than the sum of the isolated component effects (sub-additivity), or was more influenced by one component than another (selection). For contexts that were separated in time (600 ms), the combined effect measured the exact sum of the isolated component effects (in degrees of bias). Overall, the results imply an initial compressive transformation during visual processing, followed by selection between the processed parts.HighlightsNon-linear sub-additivity for increased context area or contrastNon-linear selection between overlapping or adjacent, dissimilar contextsLinear additivity for combinations of temporally separated contexts

Orientation-Selective Inhibition and Binocular Rivalry

Perception ◽  
1978 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 207-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Walker
Keyword(s):  
Negative Correlation ◽  
Binocular Rivalry ◽  
Lateral Inhibition ◽  
Sensory Input ◽  
Visual Stimuli ◽  
Interocular Transfer ◽  
Selective Inhibition ◽  
Tilt Illusion ◽  
Fundamental Parameters ◽  
Dichoptic Viewing

It is hypothesized that a negative correlation exists between the readiness with which two visual stimuli display rivalry and the magnitude of the inhibition effects between the corresponding neural channels. With binocular rivalry being more readily observed than monocular rivalry, it is predicted that lateral inhibition between neural channels selectively sensitive to such fundamental parameters as orientation, is primarily confined to those monocularly driven channels deriving their sensory input from the same eye. In confirmation, it is shown that the visual tilt illusion, thought to reflect lateral inhibition between orientation-sensitive channels, is very much reduced under dichoptic viewing conditions. Moreover, it is shown that those subjects displaying the greatest interocular transfer of the illusion least readily experience binocular rivalry.

Lateral inhibition in a recurrent network

1997 ◽  
Author(s):  
William T. Farrar ◽  
Guy C. Van Orden
Keyword(s):  
Lateral Inhibition ◽  
Recurrent Network

The Effect of Local and Global Visual Cues on the Tilt Illusion

2006 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 51-56
Author(s):  
Ellen L. Schroeder ◽  
Amber Levendusky
Keyword(s):  
Visual Cues ◽  
Tilt Illusion
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document