scholarly journals A comment on “The effects of framing ratio and oblique length on Ponzo illusion magnitude”

1988 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 201-202 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander W. Pressey
1998 ◽  
Vol 61 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-124 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sergio Roncato ◽  
Oronzo Parlangeli ◽  
Gianluca Farfaneti

1987 ◽  
Vol 41 (5) ◽  
pp. 435-439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Jordan ◽  
Jeff Randall

1997 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Prinzmetal ◽  
Arthur P. Shimamura ◽  
Michelle Mikolinski

1983 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
pp. 476-478 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn A. L. Bayne ◽  
Roger T. Davis

1971 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 97-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcia Farquhar ◽  
Herschel W. Leibowitz

Perception ◽  
1979 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 401-412 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clare Porac ◽  
Stanley Coren ◽  
Joan S Girgus ◽  
Mickey Verde

The possibility of sex differences in responses to visual-geometric illusions was investigated with the use of forty-five illusion variants and a sample of 221 observers. No difference in illusion magnitude as a function of sex was found. A second experiment measured illusion decrement and transfer of decrement to other illusion configurations. Again there were no significant differences between male and female observers.


2019 ◽  
Vol 82 (4) ◽  
pp. 1896-1911
Author(s):  
Leo Poom

AbstractExplanations of the Ponzo size illusion, the simultaneous contrast illusion, and the Craik-O’Brien-Cornsweet brightness illusions involve either stimulus-driven processes (assimilation, enhanced contrast, and anchoring) or prior experiences. Real-world up-down asymmetries for typical direction of illumination and ground planes in our physical environment should influence these illusions if they are experience based, but not if they are stimulus driven. Results presented here demonstrate differences in illusion strengths between upright and inverted versions of all three illusions. A left-right asymmetry of the Cornsweet illusion was produced by manipulating the direction of illumination, providing further support for the involvement of an experience-based explanation. When the inducers were incompatible with the targets being located at the different distances, the Ponzo illusion persisted and so did the influence from orientation, providing evidence for involvement of processes other than size constancy. As defined here, upright for the brightness illusions is consistent with an interpretation of a shaded bulging surface and a 3D object resulting from a light-from-above assumption triggering compensation for varying illumination. Upright for the Ponzo illusion is consistent with the inducers in the form of converging lines being interpreted as railway tracks receding on the ground triggering size constancy effects. The implications of these results, and other results providing evidence against experience-based accounts of the illusions, are discussed.


1979 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 169-177 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ernest Greene ◽  
Robert M. Tager

Author(s):  
William L. Phillips
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document