Skip to main content
Log in

When does action resist visual illusion? The effect of Müller–Lyer stimuli on reflexive and voluntary saccades

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Experimental Brain Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The primate visual cortex exhibits two anatomically distinct pathways (dorsal and ventral). According to the “two visual systems hypothesis” (TVSH) of Milner and Goodale (The visual brain in action. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1995), this anatomical distinction corresponds to a functional division of labor between vision-for-action (dorsal) and vision-for-perception (ventral). This proposal is supported by evidence that, in healthy volunteers, perceptual responses are affected by visual illusions, whereas motor responses to the same illusion-inducing stimuli are not. However, previously we have shown that the amplitude of saccadic eye movements is modified by the Müller–Lyer illusion in a similar manner as perceptual responses. Here we extend this finding to reflexive and voluntary (memory-guided) saccades. We show that both types of saccade can be strongly affected by the illusion. In our studies, the effect on reflexive saccades was comparable to that usually observed with verbal reports (an effect size of 22 ± 8%), whereas the effect on voluntary saccades was smaller (11 ± 11%). In addition, both types of saccade provide evidence for the scaling bias usually observed in perceptual responses. We suggest that previous studies may have employed methods that generally reduced the effect of the illusion. Interpretations of dissociations between reflexive and voluntary saccades in terms of the TVSH appear to be premature.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bernardis P, Knox P, Bruno N (2005) How does action resist visual illusion? Uncorrected oculomotor information does not account for accurate pointing in peripersonal space. Exp Brain Res 162:133–144

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Binsted G, Elliot D (1999) The Muller–Lyer illusion as a perturbation to the saccadic system. Hum Movement Sci 18:103–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradshaw MF, Watt SJ (2002) A dissociation of perception and action in normal human observers: the effect of temporal delay. Neuropsycholgia 40:1766–1778

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown MRG, DeSouza JFX, Goltz HC, Ford K, Menon RS, Goodale MA, Everling S (2004) Comparison of memory- and visually guided saccades using event-related fMRI. J Neurophysiol 91:873–889

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bruno N (2001) When does action resist visual illusions? TICS 5:385–388

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruno N, Bernadis P (2002) Dissociating perception and action in Kanizsa’s compression illusion. Psychon Bull Rev 9:723–730

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bruno N, Bernardis P (2003) When does action resist visual illisions? Effector position modulates illusory influences on motor responses. Exp Brain Res 151:225–237

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Carey DP (2001) Do action systems resist visual illusions? TICS 5:109–113

    Google Scholar 

  • de Grave D, Smeets J, Brenner E (2006a) Why are saccades influenced by the Brentano illusion? Exp Brain Res 175:177–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Grave DDJ, Franz VH, Gegenfurtner KR (2006b) The influence of the Brentano illusion on eye and hand movements. J Vis 6:727–738

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer B, Weber H (1992) Characteristics of “anti” saccades in man. Exp Brain Res 89:415–424

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer B, Weber H (1993) Express saccades and visual attention. Behav Brain Sci 16:553–610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franz VH (2001) Action does not resist visual illusions. TICS 5:457–459

    Google Scholar 

  • Franz VH, Gergenfurtner KR, Bulthoff HH, Fahle M (2000) Grasping visual illusions: no evidence for a dissociation between percpetion and action. Psychol Sci 11:20–25

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Goodale MA, Westwood DA (2004) An evolving view of duplex vision: separate but interacting cortical pathways for perception and action. Curr Opin Neurobiol 14:203–211

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hallett P (1978) Primary and secondary saccades to goals defined by instructions. Vis Res 18:1279–1296

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hu Y, Eagleson R, Goodale MA (1999) The effects of delay on the kinematics of grasping. Exp Brain Res 126:109–116

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jeannerod M, Jacob P (2005) Visual cognition: a new look at the two-visual systems model. Neuropsychologia 43:301–312

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Knox PC (2006) The effect of Kanizsa’s compression illusion on reflexive saccades. Exp Brain Res 175:764–768

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Krauzlis RJ, Miles FA (1996) Release of fixation for pursuit and saccades in humans: evidence for shared inputs acting on different neural substrates. J Neurophysiol 76:2822–2833

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Machado L, Rafal R (2000) Control of eye movement reflexes. Exp Brain Res 135:73–80

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McCarley JS, Kramer AF, DiGirolamo GJ (2003) Differential effects of the Muller–Lyer illusion on reflexive and voluntary saccades. J Vis 3:751–760

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Melcher D, Kowler E (1999) Shapes, surfaces and saccades. Vis Res 39:2929–2946

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Milner D, Dyde R (2003) Why do some perceptual illusions affect visually guided action, when others don’t? TICS 7:10–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Milner AD, Goodale MA (1995) The visual brain in action. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Munoz DP (2002) Commentary: saccadic eye movements: overview of neural circuitry. Prog Brain Res 140:3–19

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Musseler J, Heijden AHCvd, Kerzel D (2004) Visual space perception and action: introductory remarks. Vis Cogn 11:129–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pavani F, Boscagli I, Benvenuti F, Rabuffetti M, Farnè A (1999) Are perception and action affected differently by the Titchener circles illusion? Exp Brain Res 127:95–101

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pierrot-Deseilligny C, Müri RM, Rivaud-Pechoux S, Gaymard B, Ploner CJ (2002) Cortical control of spatial memory in humans: the visuooculomotor model. Ann Neurol 52:10–19

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pratt J, Bekkring H, Abrams RA, Adam J (1999) The gap effect for spatially oriented responses. Acta Psychol 102:1–12

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Prochazka A, Clarac F, Loeb GE, Rothwell JC, Wolpaw JR (2000) What do reflex and voluntary mean? Modern views on an ancient debate. Exp Brain Res 130:417–432

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rizzolatti G, Matelli M (2003) Two different streams form the dorsal visual system: anatomy and functions. Exp Brain Res 153:146–157

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ungerleider LG, Mishkin M (1982) Two cortical visual systems. In: Ingle DJ, Goodale MA, Mansfield RJW (eds) Analysis of visual behaviour. MIT, Cambridge, pp 549–586

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker R, Deubel H, Schneider WX, Findlay JM (1997) Effect of remote distractors on saccade programming: evidence for an extended fixation zone. J Neurophysiol 78:1108–1119

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Walker R, Walker DG, Husain M, Kennard C (2000) Control of voluntary and reflexive saccades. Exp Brain Res 130:540–544

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wong E, Mack A (1981) Saccadic programming and perceived location. Acta Psychol 48:123–131

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul C. Knox.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Knox, P.C., Bruno, N. When does action resist visual illusion? The effect of Müller–Lyer stimuli on reflexive and voluntary saccades. Exp Brain Res 181, 277–287 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-007-0927-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-007-0927-y

Keywords

Navigation