Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 230, Issue 2, pp 219–231 | Cite as

Global processing during the Müller-Lyer illusion is distinctively affected by the degree of autistic traits in the typical population

  • Philippe A. Chouinard
  • William A. Noulty
  • Irene Sperandio
  • Oriane Landry
Research Article

Abstract

Earlier work examining susceptibility to visual illusions in autism has reported discrepant findings. Some of this research suggests that global processing is affected in autism while some of this research suggests otherwise. The discrepancies may relate to compliance issues and differences in population samples in terms of symptom severity, cognitive ability, and co-morbid disorders. Equally important, most of this work tended to treat global processing as if it were a singular construct, invoking similar cognitive operations across different visual illusions. We argue that this is not a fair assumption to make given the extensive research that has classified visual illusions on the basis of their cognitive demands. With this in mind, and to overcome the many caveats associated with examining a heterogeneous disorder such as autism directly, we examined how susceptibility to various illusions relates differently to people’s scores on the Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ) questionnaire. We found that susceptibility to the Müller-Lyer but not to the Ebbinghaus and Ponzo illusions decreased as a function of AQ and that the relationship between AQ and susceptibility to the Müller-Lyer illusion was different from those between AQ and susceptibility to the Ebbinghaus and Ponzo illusions. Our findings confirm that the cognitive operations underlying global processing in the Müller-Lyer illusion are different from the other illusions and, more importantly, reveal that they might be affected in autism. Future brain mapping studies could provide additional insight into the neural underpinnings of how global processing might and might not be affected in autism.

Keywords

Müller-Lyer illusion Ebbinghaus illusion Ponzo illusion Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ) questionnaire Autism spectrum disorders Vision 

References

  1. Association AP (2000) Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. American Psychiatric Association, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  2. Austin EJ (2005) Personality correlates of the broader autism phenotype as assessed by the Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ). Pers Individ Dif 38:451–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bar M (2004) Visual objects in context. Nat Rev Neurosci 5:617–629PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baron-Cohen S, Wheelwright S, Hill J, Raste Y, Plumb I (2001a) The “reading the mind in the eyes” test revised version: a study with normal adults, and adults with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 42:241–251PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baron-Cohen S, Wheelwright S, Skinner R, Martin J, Clubley E (2001b) The autism-spectrum quotient (AQ): evidence from Asperger syndrome/high-functioning autism, males and females, scientists and mathematicians. J Autism Dev Disord 31:5–17PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bayliss AP, Kritikos A (2011) Brief report: perceptual load and the autism spectrum in typically developed individuals. J Autism Dev Disord 41:1573–1578PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bayliss AP, Tipper SP (2005) Gaze and arrow cueing of attention reveals individual differences along the autism spectrum as a function of target context. Br J Psychol 96:95–114PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ben-Shalom A, Ganel T (2012) Object representations in visual memory: evidence from visual illusions. J Vis 12:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bölte S, Holtmann M, Poustka F, Scheurich A, Schmidt L (2007) Gestalt perception and local-global processing in high-functioning autism. J Autism Dev Disord 37:1493–1504PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Buckingham G, Goodale MA (2013) Size matters: a single representation underlies our perceptions of heaviness in the size-weight illusion. PLoS ONE 8:e54709PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Catani M, Ffytche DH (2005) The rises and falls of disconnection syndromes. Brain 128:2224–2239PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2012) Prevalence of autism spectrum disorders- autism and developmental disabilities monitoring network, United States, 2008. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 61:1–24Google Scholar
  13. Coren S, Enns JT (1993) Size contrast as a function of conceptual similarity between test and inducers. Percept Psychophys 54:579–588PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Coren S, Girgus JS, Erlichman H, Hakstian AR (1976) An empirical taxonomy of visual illusions. Percept Psychophys 20:129–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Donohue SE, Darling EF, Mitroff SR (2012) Links between multisensory processing and autism. Exp Brain Res 222:377–387PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dunn OJ (1961) Multiple comparisons among means. J Am Stat Assoc 56:52–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fang F, Boyaci H, Kersten D, Murray SO (2008) Attention-dependent representation of a size illusion in human V1. Curr Biol 18:1707–1712PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Farah MJ (2004) Visual agnosia. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  19. Frith U (1989) Autism: explaining the enigma. Blackwell Scientific Publications, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  20. Gillberg C, Billstedt E (2000) Autism and Asperger syndrome: coexistence with other clinical disorders. Acta Psychiatr Scand 102:321–330PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ginsburg AP (1984) Visual form perception based on biological filtering. In: Spillman L, Wooten BR (eds) Sensory experience, adaptation and perception. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJGoogle Scholar
  22. Gregory RL (1963) Distortion of visual space as inappropriate constancy scaling. Nature 199:678–680PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gregory RL (2009) Seeing through illusions. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  24. Happé FG (1996) Studying weak central coherence at low levels: children with autism do not succumb to visual illusions. A research note. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 37:873–877PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Happé F (1999) Autism: cognitive deficit or cognitive style? Trends Cogn Sci 3:216–222PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Happé F, Frith U (2006) The weak coherence account: detail-focused cognitive style in autism spectrum disorders. J Autism Dev Disord 36:5–25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Happé F, Ronald A, Plomin R (2006) Time to give up on a single explanation for autism. Nat Neurosci 9:1218–1220PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Howe CQ, Purves D (2005) The Muller-Lyer illusion explained by the statistics of image-source relationships. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102:1234–1239PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hoy JA, Hatton C, Hare D (2004) Weak central coherence: a cross-domain phenomenon specific to autism? Autism 8:267–281PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hudson M, Nijboer TC, Jellema T (2012) Implicit social learning in relation to autistic-like traits. J Autism Dev Disord 42:2534–2545PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Jolliffe T, Baron-Cohen S (1997) Are people with autism and Asperger syndrome faster than normal on the Embedded Figures Test? J Child Psychol Psychiatry 38:527–534PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Maes JH, Vissers CT, Egger JI, Eling PA (2013) On the relationship between autistic traits and executive functioning in a non-clinical Dutch student population. Autism 17:379–389Google Scholar
  33. McCready DW Jr (1965) Size-distance perception and accommodation-convergence micropsia—a critique. Vis Res 5:189–206PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McCready D (1985) On size, distance, and visual angle perception. Percept Psychophys 37:323–334PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Milne E, Swettenham J, Hansen P, Campbell R, Jeffries H, Plaisted K (2002) High motion coherence thresholds in children with autism. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 43:255–263PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mottron L, Burack JA (2001) Enhanced perceptual functioning in the development of autism. In: Burack JA, Charman T, Yirmiya N, Zelazo PR (eds) The development of autism: Perspectives from theory and research. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJGoogle Scholar
  37. Mottron L, Dawson M, Soulieres I, Hubert B, Burack J (2006) Enhanced perceptual functioning in autism: an update, and eight principles of autistic perception. J Autism Dev Disord 36:27–43PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Murray SO, Boyaci H, Kersten D (2006) The representation of perceived angular size in human primary visual cortex. Nat Neurosci 9:429–434PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Plewan T, Weidner R, Eickhoff SB, Fink GR (2012) Ventral and dorsal stream interactions during the perception of the Muller-Lyer illusion: evidence derived from fmri and dynamic causal modeling. J Cogn Neurosci 24:2015–2029PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pressey AW (1967) A theory of the Mueller-Lyer illusion. Percept Mot Skills 25:569–572PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pressey AW, Epp D (1992) Spatial attention in Ponzo-like patterns. Percept Psychophys 52:211–221PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Prinzmetal W, Shimamura AP, Mikolinski M (2001) The Ponzo illusion and the perception of orientation. Percept Psychophys 63:99–114PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ropar D, Mitchell P (1999) Are individuals with autism and Asperger’s syndrome susceptible to visual illusions? J Child Psychol Psychiatry 40:1283–1293PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Ropar D, Mitchell P (2001) Susceptibility to illusions and performance on visuospatial tasks in individuals with autism. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 42:539–549PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Schwarzkopf DS, Song C, Rees G (2011) The surface area of human V1 predicts the subjective experience of object size. Nat Neurosci 14:28–30PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Segall MH, Campbell DT, Herskovits MJ (1963) Cultural differences in the perception of geometric illusions. Science 139:769–771PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Shah A, Frith U (1983) An islet of ability in autistic children: a research note. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 24:613–620PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Spencer J, O’Brien J, Riggs K, Braddick O, Atkinson J, Wattam-Bell J (2000) Motion processing in autism: evidence for a dorsal stream deficiency. Neuroreport 11:2765–2767PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sperandio I, Savazzi S, Marzi CA (2010) Is simple reaction time affected by visual illusions? Exp Brain Res 201:345–350PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sperandio I, Chouinard PA, Goodale MA (2012) Retinotopic activity in V1 reflects the perceived and not the retinal size of an afterimage. Nat Neurosci 15:540–542PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sutherland A, Crewther DP (2010) Magnocellular visual evoked potential delay with high autism spectrum quotient yields a neural mechanism for altered perception. Brain 133:2089–2097PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Walter E, Dassonville P, Bochsler TM (2009) A specific autistic trait that modulates visuospatial illusion susceptibility. J Autism Dev Disord 39:339–349PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Weidner R, Fink GR (2007) The neural mechanisms underlying the Muller-Lyer illusion and its interaction with visuospatial judgments. Cereb Cortex 17:878–884PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Whitehouse AJ, Barry JG, Bishop DV (2007) The broader language phenotype of autism: a comparison with specific language impairment. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 48:822–830PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Philippe A. Chouinard
    • 1
  • William A. Noulty
    • 2
  • Irene Sperandio
    • 1
    • 3
  • Oriane Landry
    • 2
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Psychology, Brain and Mind InstituteThe University of Western OntarioLondonCanada
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyDalhousie UniversityHalifaxCanada
  3. 3.School of PsychologyUniversity of East AngliaNorwichUK
  4. 4.Department of Psychology, Neuroscience & BehaviourMcMaster UniversityHamiltonCanada

Personalised recommendations