Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Effectiveness of Discrimination of the Sizes of Line Segments by Humans with Different Cognitive Style Parameters

  • Published:
Neuroscience and Behavioral Physiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

The effectiveness of the discrimination of segment sizes by people with different cognitive style parameters – field dependence vs. field independence, analytical vs. synthetic, and flexible vs. rigid cognitive control – was studied. Discrimination effectiveness was assessed in terms of the magnitude of the Ponzo illusion. The magnitude of the Ponzo illusion was found to be significantly smaller in subjects with a field-independent cognitive style than in those with a field-dependent style. People with the flexible type of cognitive control demonstrated a tendency to more accurate perception of segment size in the Ponzo figure than those with rigid control. There was no relationship between the analytical-synthetic style of categorization and the magnitude of the Ponzo illusion.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. V. V. Kochetkov and I. G. Skotnikova, Individual Psychological Problems in Decision-Taking, Nauka, Moscow (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  2. I. G. Skotnikova, “Subjective psychophysics: study results,” Psikhol. Zh., 24, No. 2, 121–131 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  3. M. A. Kholodnaya, Cognitive Styles. The Nature of the Individual Mind, Piter, St. Petersburg (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  4. A. I. Chakalina, “Experimental studies of the contribution of ‘fielddependent/field-independent’ cognitive style in the sensory performance of tasks with different levels of information load,” Vestn. Ekaterininsk. Inst., No. 4, 36–48 (2008).

  5. A. I. Chekalina and A. N. Gusev, “Effects of flexibility/rigidity of cognitive control on the effectiveness of solving sensory tasks with different levels of information load,” Vestn. Gos. Obl. Univ. Ser. Psikhol. Nauki, No. 4, 3–10 (2008).

  6. Yu. E. Shelepin, “The filtration properties of the receptive fields of visual cortex neurons,” Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR, 261, No. 6, 1506–1509 (1981).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Yu. E. Shelepin, “Local and global analysis in the visual system,” in: Contemporary Psychophysics,V. A. Barabanshchikov (ed.), Institute of Psychology, Russian Academy of Sciences (2009), pp. 312–337.

  8. Yu. E. Shelepin, V. N. Chikhman, and N. Foreman, “Analysis of studies of the perception of fragmented images: overall perception and perception using local signs,” Fiziol. Zh., 94, No. 7, 758–776 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  9. I. I. Shoshina, I. N. Perevozchikova, Yu. E. Shelepin, et al., “Characteristics of the perception of segment length in the Ponzo and Müller–Lyer illusions in schizophrenia,” Zh. Vyssh. Nerv. Deyat., 61, No. 6, 697–705 (2011).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. I. I. Shoshina, S. V. Pronin, and Yu. E. Shelepin, “Effects of prior filtration of images on thresholds of segment length discrimination in the Müller–Lyer illusion,” Eksperim. Psikhol., 3, No. 4, 16–23 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  11. C. Blakemore and F. Campbell, “On the existence of neurones in the human visual system selectively sensitive to the orientation and size of retinal images,” J. Physiol., 203, 237–260 (1969).

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. S. Bölte, M. Holtmann, F. Poustka, et al., “Gestalt perception and local-global processing in high-functioning autism,” J. Autism Dev. Disord., 37, No. 8, 1493–1504 (2007).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. O. Braddick, J. M. D. O’Brien, J. Wattam-Bell, et al., “Form and motion coherence activate independent, but not dorsal/ventral segregated networks in the human brain,” Curr. Biol., 10, 731–734 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. D. M. Broverman, “Cognitive style and intraindividual variation in abilities,” J. Personality, 28, 240–255 (1960).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. F. Campbell and J. Robson, “Application of Fourier analysis to the visibility of gratings,” J. Physiol., 197, 551–556 (1968).

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. S. Coren and C. Porac, “Individual differences in visual-geometric illusions: Predictions from measures of spatial cognitive abilities,” Percept. Psychophys., 41, No. 3, 211–219 (1987).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. R. W. Gardner, “Cognitive controls of attention deployment as determinants of visual illusions,” J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol., 62, 120–127 (1961).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. A. P. Ginsburg and D. W. Evans, “Predicting visual illusions form filtered images based on biological data,” J. Opt. Soc. Am., 69, 1443–1450 (1979).

    Google Scholar 

  19. E. J. Grinter, M. T. Maybery, P. L. Van Beek, et al., “Global visual processing and self-rated autistic-like traits,” J. Autism Dev. Disord., 39, No. 9, 1278–1290 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. S. Kincade, Age, Sex, and Cognitive Style in the Ponzo Illusion, Univ. Publ., New Brunswick (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  21. E. Milne and M. Szczerbinski, “Global and local perceptual style, field-independence, and central coherence: An attempt at concept validation,” Adv. Cogn. Psychol., 5, 1–26 (2009).

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. R. E. Nisbett and Y. Miyamoto, “The influence of culture: holistic versus analytic perception,” Trends Cogn. Sci., 9, No. 10, 467–473 (2005).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. A. W. Pressey, “Field dependence and susceptibility to the Poggendorff illusion,” Percept. Mot. Skills, 24, 309–310 (1967).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. D. Ropar and P. Mitchell, “Susceptibility to illusions and performance on visuospatial tasks in individuals with autism,” J. Child. Dev. Psychiatry, 42, No. 4, 539–549 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. D. Schiano and H. Zhang, “Cognitive styles: Illusory phenomena,” Percept. Mot. Skills, 60, 201–202 (1985).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. D. Wagner, “Ontogeny of the Ponzo illusion: Effects of age, schooling, and environment,” Int. J. Psychol., 12, No. 3, 161–175 (1977).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. E. Walter, P. Dassonville, and T. M. Bochsler, “A specific autistic trait that modulates visuospatial illusion susceptibility,” J. Autism Dev. Disord., 39, No. 2, 339–349 (2009).

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. T. Weckowitz and G. Witney, “The Müller–Lyer illusion in schizophrenic patients,” J. Ment. Sci., 106, 1002–1007 (1960).

    Google Scholar 

  29. H. A. Witkin, R. B. Dyke, H. F. Paterson, et al., Psychological Differentiation, Wiley, New York (1962).

    Google Scholar 

  30. C. Song, D. Schwarzkopf, and G. Rees, “Interocular induction of illusory size perception,” Neurosci. (2011), www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2202/12/27.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. I. P. Pavlov Institute of Physiology, St. Petersburg, Russia

    I. I. Shoshina & Yu. E. Shelepin

  2. Siberian Federal University, Krasnoyarsk, Russia

    I. I. Shoshina

Authors
  1. I. I. Shoshina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yu. E. Shelepin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to I. I. Shoshina.

Additional information

Translated from Zhurnal Vysshei Nervnoi Deyatel’nosti imeni I. P. Pavlova, Vol. 63, No. 3, pp. 349–356, May–June, 2013.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shoshina, I.I., Shelepin, Y.E. Effectiveness of Discrimination of the Sizes of Line Segments by Humans with Different Cognitive Style Parameters. Neurosci Behav Physi 44, 748–753 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11055-014-9978-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11055-014-9978-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation