Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Relation between the Wundt–Hering Illusion, the Tilt Illusion, and Estimation of Length of Inclined Line Projections

  • Published:
Human Physiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In psychophysical studies, we compared the Wundt–Hering illusion (or fan’s illusion) with distortions in perception of the orientation of lines and in estimation of lengths of the inclined lines projections. Four experiments were carried out: the curvature of the lines crossing the divergent lines (fan) was determined; the curvature of the mentally drawn lines through points located on the fan was evaluated; the tilt illusion that appeared due to contact of the inclined line with the test one was studied; and the length of the projections of the inclined lines was estimated. It was shown that the curvature of the lines is evaluated identically for the continuous lines and for the lines interpolated through the points of intersection with the fan. The length of projections of the inclined lined is overestimated by some observers and underestimated by others. A test line seems to be inclined to an additional line for small difference in orientations, but it seems tilted in the opposite direction with increasing differences. The hypotheses of the genesis of the Wundt–Hering illusion and the tilt illusion, as well as the connection between the obtained distortions of visual perception are discussed.

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.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. Gregory, R.L., Eye and Brain: The Psychology of Seeing, Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Hering, E., Beiträge zur Physiologie, No. 1: Zur Lehre vom Ortssinne der Netzhaut, Leipzig: Engelmann, 1861.

  3. Wundt, W., Beiträge zur Theorie der Sinneswahrnehmung, Leipzig: Wintersche Verlag, 1862.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Holt-Hansen, K., Hering’s illusion, Br. J. Psychol., 1961, vol. 52, p. 317.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Chiang, C., A new theory to explain geometrical illusions produced by crossing lines, Percept. Psychophys., 1968, vol. 3, p. 174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Prinzmetal, W. and Beck, D.M., The tilt-constancy theory of visual illusions, J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform., 2001, vol. 27, no. 1, p. 206.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hamburger, K., Hansen, T., and Gegenfurtner, K.R., Geometric-optical illusions at isoluminance, Vision Res., 2007, vol. 47, no. 26, p. 3276.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Prinzmetal, W., Shimamura, A.P., and Mikolinsky, M., The Ponzo illusion and the perception of orientation, Percept. Psychophys., 2001, vol. 63, no. 1, p. 99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Coren, S., Lateral inhibition and the Wundt-Hering illusion, Psychon. Sci., 1970, vol. 18, no. 6, p. 341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Changizi, M.A., ‘Perceiving the present’ as a framework for ecological explanations of the misperception of projected angle and angular size, Perception, 2001, vol. 30, no. 2, p. 195.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Changizi, M.A., Hsieh, A., Nijhawan, R., et al., Perceiving the present and a systematization of illusions, Cognit. Sci., 2008, vol. 32, no. 3, p. 459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Changizi, M.A. and Widders, D.M., Latency correction explains the classical geometrical illusions, Perception, 2002, vol. 31, no. 10, p. 1241.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Vaughn, D.A. and Eagleman, D.M., Spatial warping by oriented line detectors can counteract neural delays, Front. Psychol., 2013, vol. 4, p. 794.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Nundy, S., Lotto, B., Coppola, D., and Purves, A., Why are angles misperceived? Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 2000, vol. 97, no. 10, p. 5592.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Howe, C.Q. and Purves, D., Natural-scene geometry predicts the perception of angles and line orientation, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 2005, vol. 102, no. 4, p. 1228.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Rozhkova, G.I., Tokareva, V.S., Ognivov, V.V., and Bastakov, V.A., Geometrical visual illusions and constancy mechanism of size perception in children, Sens. Sist., 2005, vol. 19, no. 1, p. 26.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Bulatov, A., Bertulis, A., Gutauskas, A., and Bulatova, N., Stimulus size and the magnitude of the visual illusion of extent, Hum. Physiol., 2010, vol. 36, no. 2, p. 164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Blakemore, C., Carpenter, R.H.S., and Georgeson, M.A., Lateral inhibition between orientation detectors in the human visual system, Nature, 1970, vol. 228, no. 5266, p. 37.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Bouma, H. and Andriessen, J.J., Induced changes in the perceived orientation of line segments, Vision Res., 1970, vol. 10, no. 4, p. 333.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Morgan, M.J., Mason, A.J.S., and Baldassi, S., Are there separate first-order and second-order mechanisms for orientation discrimination? Vision Res., 2000, vol. 40, no. 13, p. 1751.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bondarko, V.M. and Semenov, L.A., The influence of context on the line orientation discrimination, Sens. Sist., 2011, vol. 25, no. 3, p. 257.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Calvert, J.E. and Harris, J.P., Spatial frequency and duration effect on the tilt illusion and orientation acuity, Vision Res., 1988, vol. 28, no. 9, p. 1051.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Corbett, J.E., Handy, T.C., and Enns, J.T., When do we know which way is up? The time course of orientation perception, Vision Res., 2009, vol. 49, no. 1, p. 28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Solomon, J.A. and Morgan, M.J., Strong tilt illusions always reduce orientation acuity, Vision Res., 2009, vol. 49, no. 8, p. 819.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Vakhrameeva, O.A., Harauzov, A.K., Pronin, S.V., Malakhova, E.Y., and Shelepin, Y.E., Visual priming and perception of small pictures in a scene with multiscale objects, Hum. Physiol., 2016, vol. 42, no. 5, p. 499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Wenderoth, P., O’Connor, T., and Johnson, S., The tilt illusion as a function of the relative and absolute lengths of test and inducing lines, Percept. Psychophys., 1985, vol. 39, p. 339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Farber, D.A. and Petrenko, N.E., Recognition of fragmented images and mechanisms of memory, Hum. Physiol., 2008, vol. 34, no. 1, p. 1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Farber, D.A. and Petrenko, N.E., Specificity of recognition of fragmented images in seven- to eight-year-old children: Analysis of event-related potentials, Hum. Physiol., 2009, vol. 35, no. 3, p. 259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Sasaki, Y., Rajimehr, R., Kim, B.W., et al., The radial bias: a different slant on visual orientation sensitivity in human and nonhuman primates, Neuron, 2006, vol. 51, no. 5, p. 661.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We gratefully acknowledge the staff of the Laboratory of Information Technologies and Mathematical Modeling, Pavlov Institute of Physiology, Russian Academy of Sciences (St. Petersburg) for help in performing the study.

Funding

This study was supported by the Basic Research Program for the State Academies of Sciences for 2013–2020 (GP-14, Section 63).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Pavlov Institute of Physiology, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg, Russia

    V. M. Bondarko, D. V. Bondarko, S. D. Solnushkin & V. N. Chikhman

Authors
  1. V. M. Bondarko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. D. V. Bondarko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. S. D. Solnushkin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. V. N. Chikhman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to V. M. Bondarko.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest. The authors declare no explicit and potential conflicts of interest associated with the publication of this article.

Statement of compliance with standards of research involving humans as subjects. All studies were performed in accordance with the principles of biomedical ethics set out in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments and approved by the Ethics Committee of St. Petersburg State University.

Informed consent. Each study participant provided a signed voluntary written informed consent after explanations of potential risks and benefits as well as the nature of the forthcoming investigations.

Additional information

Translated by M. Batrukova

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bondarko, V.M., Bondarko, D.V., Solnushkin, S.D. et al. Relation between the Wundt–Hering Illusion, the Tilt Illusion, and Estimation of Length of Inclined Line Projections. Hum Physiol 45, 370–377 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1134/S0362119719030022

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S0362119719030022

Keywords:

Search

Navigation