Skip to main content
Download PDF

Orientation specificity of length assimilation and contrast

Perception & Psychophysics volume 43, pages 446–456 (1988)Cite this article

Abstract

The orientation specificity of length assimilation and contrast was assessed using the parallellines array. The purpose was to determine the nature of the representation of length both within and outside of the “attentive field.” Experiments 1 and 2 demonstrated that when both contextual and test lines are within an attentive field and do not intersect, the resulting simultaneous length assimilation is independent of orientation. In Experiment 3, simultaneous length contrast was produced by placing the contextual line outside of the attentive field; it also was independent of orientation. Finally, Experiment 4 demonstrated that the sequential length contrast (length aftereffect) produced by a 5-sec prior inspection of a contextual line was independent of orientation, whereas the contrast produced by 60 sec of contextual-line inspection showed some degree of orientation specificity. These results, combined with those obtained with orientation illusions (Tyler & Nakayama, 1984; Wenderoth & Johnson, 1984; Wenderoth, O’Connor, & Johnson, 1986), suggest a qualitative relationship of length and orientation coding that is characterized by partial and mutual overlap of length and orientation information.

References

  • Appelle, S. (1972). Perception and discrimination as a function of stimulus orientation: The “oblique effect” in man and animals.Psychological Bulletin,78, 266–278.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Attneave, F., &Olson, R. (1967). Discriminability of stimuli varying in physical and retinal orientation.Journal of Experimental Psychology,74, 149–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brigell, M., &Uhlarik, J. (1979). The relational determination of length illusions and aftereffects.Perception,8, 187–197.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burton, G. J., &Ruddock, K. H. (1978). Visual adaptation to patterns containing two-dimensional spatial structure.Vision Research,18, 93–99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, F. W., &Maffei, L. (1971). The tilt aftereffect: A fresh look.Vision Research,11, 833–840.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Coren, S., &Girgus, J. S. (1972). A comparison of five methods of illusion measurement.Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation,4, 240–244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coren, S., &Girgus, J. S. (1978).Seeing is deceiving: The psychology of visual illusions. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ejima, Y., &Takahashi, S. (1985). Effect of localized grating adaptation as a function of separation along the length axis between test and adaptation areas.Vision Research,25, 1701–1707.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, G. H. (1968). Gradients of distortion seen in the context of the Ponzo illusion and other contours.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,20, 212–217.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Georgeson, M. A. (1973). Spatial frequency selectivity of a visual tilt illusion.Nature,245, 43–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Girgus, J. S., &Coren, S. (1982). Assimilation and contrast illusions: Differences in plasticity.Perception & Psychophysics,32, 555–561.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heeley, D. W. (1979). A perceived spatial frequency shift at orientations orthogonal to adapting gratings.Vision Research,19, 1229–1236.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, K., &Randall, J. (1987). The effects of framing ratio and oblique length on Ponzo illusion magnitude.Perception & Psychophysics,41, 435–439.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, K., &Schiano, D. J. (1986). Serial processing and the parallel lines illusion: Length contrast through relative spatial separation 01 contours.Perception & Psychophysics,40, 384–390.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, K., &Uhlarik, J. (1985). Assimilation and contrast of per ceived length depend on temporal factors.Perception & Psychophysics37, 447–454.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, K., &Uhlarik, J. (1986). Length contrast and the Muller Lyer figure: Functional equivalence of temporal and spatial separation.Perception & Psychophysics,39, 267–274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magnussen, S., &Kurtenbach, W. (1980). Linear summation of the tilt illusion and aftereffect.Vision Research,20, 39–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nakayama, K., &Roberts, D. J. (1972). Line length detectors in the human visual system: Evidence from selective adaptation.Vision Research,12, 1709–1713.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Paricer, D. M. (1972). Contrast and size variables and the tilt aftereffect.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,24, 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, A. W. (1972). The assimilation theory of geometric i1IIusions An additional postulate.Perception & Psychophysics,11, 28–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, A. W., &Di Lollo, V. (1978). Effects of distance between standard and comparison lines on the Miiller-Lyer illusion.Perception & Psychophysics,24, 415–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, A. W., &Murray, R. (1976). Further developments in the assimilation theory of geometric illusions: The adjacency principle.Perception & Psychophysics,19, 536–544.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, A. W., &Smith, N. E. (1986). The effects of Iocation, orientation and cumulation of boxes in the Baldwin illusion.Perception & Psychophysics,40, 344–350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, A. W., &Wilson, A. E. (1980). Assimilation theory and the Baldwin illusion.Italian Journal of Psychology,7, 65–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, C. W., &Nakayama, K. (1984). Size interactions in the per ception of orientation. In L. Spillmann & B. R. Wooten (Eds.),Sensory experience, adaptation, and perception (pp. 529–546). Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Virsu, V., &Haapasaw, S. (1973). Relationships between channel for colours and spatial frequency in human vision.Perception,2 31–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ware, C., &Mitchell, D. E. (1974). The spatial selectivity of the tilt aftereffect.Vision Research,14, 735–737.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wenderoth, P., &Johnson, M. (1984). The effects of angle-arm length on judgments of angle magnitude and orientation contrast.Perception & Psychophysics,36, 538–544.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenderoth, P., O’connor, T., &Johnson, M. (1986). The tilt illusion as a function of the relative and absolute lengths of test and inducing lines.Perception & Psychophysics,39, 339–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, M. J. (1982). Contrast sensitivity and adaptation as a function of grating length.Vision Research,22, 139–149.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Jerayr Haleblian

    Present address: University of Southern California, California, USA

Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, San Jose State University, 95192, San Jose, CA

    Kevin Jordan & Jerayr Haleblian

Authors
  1. Kevin Jordan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jerayr Haleblian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Preparation of this report was supported by NASA Grant NCC-2-327 to San Jose State University, Kevin Jordan, Project Director.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jordan, K., Haleblian, J. Orientation specificity of length assimilation and contrast. Perception & Psychophysics 43, 446–456 (1988). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03207880

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03207880

Keywords

  • Test Stimulus
  • Test Line
  • Textual Line
  • Attentive Field
  • Ponzo Illusion