Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Uznadze illusion reveals similar effects of relative size on perception and action

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

Abstract

Milner and Goodale (the visual brain in action, Oxford University Press Inc., Oxford, 1995) proposed a functional dissociation between vision-for-action and vision-for-perception (i.e., the “two-visual system hypothesis”, TVSH). Supporting the TVSH, it has been claimed that visual illusions affect perception but not actions. However, at least for the Ebbinghaus illusion, numerous studies have revealed consistent illusion effects on grasping. Thus, whether illusions affect actions remains controversial. To further investigate the dissociation predicted by the TVSH, we used a visual version of the Uznadze illusion (the same stimulus will feel smaller after feeling a larger stimulus and larger after feeling a smaller stimulus). Based on kinematic recordings of finger aperture in a motor (precision grip) and a perceptual task (manual estimation), we report two main findings. First, both action and perception are strongly affected by the Uznadze illusion. Second, the illusion decreases similarly in both tasks when inducing-induced pairs had different shape and color, in comparison to the equivalent condition where these features are the same. These results are inconsistent with a perception–action dissociation as predicted by the TVSH and suggest that, at least in the present conditions, vision-for-perception and vision-for-action are similarly affected by contextual cues.

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

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aglioti S, DeSouza JFX, Goodale MA (1995) Size-contrast deceive the eye but not the hand. Curr Biol 5(6):679–685

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Biederman I (1987) Recognition-by-components: a theory of human image understanding. Psychol Rev 94:115–147

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bruno N (2001) When does actions resist visual illusions. Trends Cogn Sci 5(9):379–382

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bruno N (2016) Visual illusions in action. In: Shapiro A, Todorovic D (eds) The Oxford compendium of visual illusions. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruno N, Franz VH (2009) When is grasping affected by the Müller-Lyer illusion? A quantitative review. Neuropsychologia 47:1421–1433

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bruno N, Bernardis P, Gentilucci M (2008) Visually guided pointing, the Müller-Lyer illusion, and the functional interpretation of the dorsal–ventral split: conclusions from 33 independent studies. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 32:423–437

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bruno N, Knox PC, de Grave DJ (2010) A metanalysis of the effect of the Müller-Lyer illusion on saccadic eye movements: no general support for a dissociation of perception and oculomotor action. Vis Res 50(24):2671–2682

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bruno N, Garofalo G, Daneyko O, Riggio L (2018) Visual similarity modulates visual size contrast. Acta Psychologica (Oxf) 188:122–130

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cardoso-Leite P, Gorea A (2010) On the perceptual/motor dissociation: a review of concepts, theory, experimental paradigms and data interpretations. Seeing Perceiving 23(2):89–151

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Carey DP (2001) Do action systems resist visual illusion? Trends Cogn Sci 5(3):109–113

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Daprati E, Gentilucci M (1997) Grasping an illusion. Neuropsychologia 35(12):1577–1582

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Franz VH (2001) Action does not resist illusion. Trends Cogn Sci 5:11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franz VH (2003) Manual size estimation: a neuropsychological measure of perception? Exp Brain Res 151:471–477

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Franz VH, Gegenfurther RK (2008) Grasping visual illusions: consistent data and no dissociation. Cogn Neuropsychol 25(7–8):920–950

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Franz VH, Gegenfurtner KR, Bülthoff HH, Fahle M (2000) Grasping visual illusions: no evidence for a dissociation between perception and action. Psychol Sci 11(1):20–25

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goodale MA (2008) Action without perception in human vision. Cogn Neuropsychol 25(7–8):891–919

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goodale MA (2011) Transforming vision into action. Vision Res 51(13):1567–1587

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goodale MA, Milner AD (1992) Separate visual pathways for perception and action. Trends Neurosci 15(1):20–25

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Haffenden AM, Goodale MA (1998) The effect of pictorial illusion on prehension and perception. J Cogn Neurosci 10:122–136

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Haffenden AM, Schiff KC, Goodale MA (2001) The dissociation between perception and action in the Ebbinghaus illusion: nonillusory effects of pictorial cues on grasp. Curr Biol 11:177–181

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kappers AML, Bergmann Tiest WM (2014) Influence of shape on the haptic size aftereffect. Plos One 9:1–8

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kopiske KK, Bruno N, Hesse C, Schenk T, Franz VH (2016) The functional subdivision of the visual brain: Is there a real illusion effect on action? A multi-lab replication study. Cortex 79:130–152

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Leys C, Ley C, Klein O, Bernard P, Licata L (2013) Detecting outliers: Do not use standard deviation around the mean, use absolute deviation around the median. J Exp Soc Psychol 49(4):764–766

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loftus GR, Masson MEJ (1994) Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs. Psychon Bull Rev 1:476–490

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McIntosh RD, Schenk T (2009) Two visual streams for perception and action: current trends. Neuropsychologia 47(6):1391–1396

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Milner AD, Goodale MA (1995) The visual brain in action, 1st edn. Oxford University Press Inc., Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Milner AD, Goodale MA (2006) The visual brain in action, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press Inc., Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Milner AD, Goodale MA (2008) Two visual systems reviewed. Neuropsychologia 46:774–785

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Milner AD, Dijkerman HC, Pisella L, McIntosh RD, Tilikete C, Vighetto A, Rossetti Y (2001) Grasping the past: delay can improve visuomotor performance. Curr Biol 11:1896–1901

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Milner AD, Ganel T, Goodale MA (2012) Does grasping in patient D.F. depend on vision? Trends Cogn Sci 16(5):256–257

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pisella L, Binfofski F, Lasek K, Toni I, Rossetti Y (2006) No double-dissociation between optic ataxia and visual agnosia: multiple sub-streams for multiple visuo-manual integrations. Neuropsychologia 44:2734–2748

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rossetti Y, Pisella L (2002) Several “vision for action” systems: a guide to dissociating and integrating dorsal and ventral functions. In: Prinz W, Hommel B (eds) Common mechanisms in perception and action: attention and performance, vol. XIX. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 375–396

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossetti Y, Pisella L, McIntosh RD (2017) Rise and fall of the two visual systems theory. Ann Phys Rehabil Med 60:130–140

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schenk T (2006) An allocentric rather than perceptual deficit in patient D.F. Nat Neurosci 9(11):13691370

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schenk T (2010) Visuomotor robustness is based on integration not segregation. Vision Res 50:2627–2632

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schenk T (2012) No dissociation between perception and action in patient DF when haptic feedback is withdrawn. J Neurosci 32(6):2013–2017

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Schenk T, MacIntosh RD (2010) Do we have independent visual streams for perception and action? Cogn Neurosci 1(1):52–62

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schenk T, Franz VH, Bruno N (2011) Vision-for-perception and vision-for-action: which model is compatible with the available psychophysical and neuropsychological data? Vis Res 51:812–818

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smeets JBJ, Brenner E (1999) A new view on grasping. Mot Control 3(3):237–271

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Smeets JBJ, Brenner E (2006) 10 Years of illusions. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 32(6):1501–1504

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens S (1957) On the psychophysical law. Psychol Rev 64(3):153–181

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ungerleider, Mishkin (1982) Contribution of striate inputs to the visuospatial functions of parieto-preoccipital cortex in monkeys. Behav Brain Res 6(1):57–77

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Uznadze D (1966) The psychology of set. Consultants bureau, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitwell RL, Milner AD, Goodale MA (2014) The two visual systems hypothesis: new challenges and insights from visual form agnosic patient DF. Front Neurol 5:255

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Whitwell RL, Goodale MA (2016) Real and illusory issues in the illusion debate (why two things are sometimes better than one): commentary on Kopiske et al. (2016). Cortex. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4748-07.2008

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Whitwell RL, Goodale MA, Merritt KE, Enns JT (2018) The Sander parallelogram illusion dissociates action and perception despite control for the litany of past confounds. Cortex 98:163–176

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Woodworth RS (1899) The accuracy of voluntary movement. Psychol Rev Monogr Suppl 3(3):i-114. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0092992

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Università di Parma, Parma, Italy

    Stefano Uccelli, Veronica Pisu, Lucia Riggio & Nicola Bruno

Authors
  1. Stefano Uccelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Veronica Pisu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lucia Riggio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Nicola Bruno
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefano Uccelli.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Uccelli, S., Pisu, V., Riggio, L. et al. The Uznadze illusion reveals similar effects of relative size on perception and action. Exp Brain Res 237, 953–965 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-019-05480-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-019-05480-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation