Skip to Main Content

Experimental Psychology (Russia)
2021. Vol. 14, no. 1, 64–79
doi:10.17759/exppsy.2021140101
ISSN: 2072-7593 / 2311-7036 (online)

Estimation of Line Orientation Depends on the Set of Additional Images

227

V.N. Chikhman, V.M. Bondarko

PDF (RUS)
Online translation in english
GS
Information
in Google Scholar

Abstract

The orientation of the lines, to which additional inclined lines could adjoin, was estimated. We have found a distortion in estimation of lines orientation by 1—2° (tilt illusion) when additional lines were presented, depending on a set of additional lines. For different observers, in the case of the presence of additional lines with a difference in orientation between the lines of up to 12°, both the effect of attraction (the lines seemed to be turned towards the additional) and the effect of repulsion could be detected. With a larger difference, only the repulsive effect is revealed. The discrepancy in the dependences can be explained by the difference in the visual acuity of observers associated with the size of the smallest receptive fields of striatal cortex neurons

General Information

Keywords: lines orientation discrimination, influence of context, tilt illusion, repulsion effect, attraction effect, vision acuity

Journal rubric: Psychology of Perception

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17759/exppsy.2021140101

Funding. This study was supported by the Program of Fundamental Scientific Research of State Academies for 2013—2020 (GP-14, section 63)

Acknowledgements. The authors are grateful in conducting the experiments to the employees of the laboratory of information technologies and mathematical modeling

For citation: Chikhman V.N., Bondarko V.M. Estimation of Line Orientation Depends on the Set of Additional Images. Eksperimental'naâ psihologiâ = Experimental Psychology (Russia), 2021. Vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 64–79. DOI: 10.17759/exppsy.2021140101. (In Russ., аbstr. in Engl.)

References

  1. Bondarko V.M. Illusia naklona I orientazionnaya chuvstvitel`nost` // Fiziologiya cheloveka. 2020. Т. 46. № 2. s. 25—34. (in Russ.).
  2. Bondarko V.M., Danilova M.V. Svyaz’ krauding-effekta s funktsionirovaniem vysokochastotnykh prostranstvennykh elementov // Sensornye sistemy. 2002. T. 16. N 2. S. 89—99. (in Russ.).
  3. Bondarko V.M., Semenov L.А. Vliyanie kontexta na razlichenie orientacii linij // Sensornye sistemy. 2011. Т.25. № 3. S. 257—263. (in Russ.).
  4. Glezer V.D. Zrenie i myshlenie. L.: Nauka, 1985. 300 s. (in Russ.).
  5. Shevelev I.A. Zritel’naya kora // Fiziologiya zreniya / Red. A.L. Byizov. M.: Nauka, 1992. С. 243—314. (in Russ.).
  6. Shelepin Yu.E. Orientazhionnaya izbiratel’noct’ i prostranstvenno-chastotnyie harakteristiki rezheptivnyih polei neironov zatylochnoi kory koshki // Neiroiziologiya. 1981a. T. 13. № 3. S. 227—232. (in Russ.).
  7. Shelepin Yu.E. Fil’trazhionnye svoistva rezheptivnyih polei neironov zritel’noi kory // Doklady AN SSSR. 1981b. T. 261. № 6. S. 1506—1509. (in Russ.).
  8. Andrews D. P. Perception of contour orientation in the central fovea //Vision Res. 1967. V. 7. P. 975— 1013.
  9. Blakemore C., Carpenter R.H.S., Georgeson M.A. Lateral inhibition between orientation detectors in the human visual system // Nature. 1970. V. 228. N 5266. P. 37—39.
  10. Bouma H., Andriessen J.J. Induced changes in the perceived orientation of line segments // Vision Res. 1970. V. 10. P. 333—349.
  11. Calvert J.E., Harris J.P. Spatial frequency and duration effect on the tilt illusion and orientation acuity // Vis. Res. 1988. V. 28. P. 1051—1059.
  12. Campbell F.W., Maffei L. The tilt aftereffect: A fresh look // Vision Res. 1971. V. 11. P. 833—844.
  13. Carpenter R.H.S., Blakemore C. Interaction between orientation in human vision // Exp. Brain Res. 1973. V. 18. P. 287—303.
  14. Corbett J.E., Handy T.C., Enns J.T. When do we know which way is up? The time course of orientation perception // Vision Res. 2009. V. 49. P. 28—37.
  15. Danilova M. V., Bondarko V. M. Foveal contour interactions and crowding effects // J. Vision. 2007. V. 7 (2). P. 1—18.
  16. Gibson J. J. Adaptation, after-effect, and contrast in the perception of tilted lines. II. Simultaneous contrast and the real restriction of the after-effect // J. Exp. Psychology. 1937. V. 20. P. 553—569.
  17. Gibson J. J., Radner M. Adaptation, after-effect and contrast in the perception of tilted lines // J. Exp. Psychology. 1937. V. 20. P. 453—467.
  18. Gilbert C.D., Wiesel T.N. The influence of contextual stimuli on the orientation selectivity of cells in primary visual cortex of the cat // Vision Rec. 1990. V. 30. P. 1689—1701.
  19. Hamburger K., Hansen T., Gegenfurtner K.R. Geometric-optical illusions at isoluminance // Vision Res. 2007. V. 47. P. 3276—3285.
  20. Hubel D.H., Wiesel T.N. Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat’s visual cortex // J. Physiol. 1962. V. 160. P.251—260.
  21. Hubel D.H., Weisel T.N. Sequence regularity and geometry of orientation columns in the monkey striate cortex // J. Comparative Neurology.1974. V. 158. P. 267—294.
  22. Magnussen S., Kurtenbach W. A test for contrast-polarity selectivity in the tilt aftereffect // Perception. 1979. V. 8. P. 523 — 528
  23. Mitchel D.E., Muir D. Does the tilt aftereffect occur in the oblique meridian? // Vision Res. 1976. V. 16. P. 609—613.
  24. Morgan M.J., Mason A.J.S., Baldassi S. Are there separate first-order and second-order mechanisms for orientation discrimination? // Vision Res. 2000. V. 40. P. 1751—1763.
  25. Over R., Broerse J., Crassini B. Orientation illusion and masking in central and peripheral vision // J. Exp. Psychol. 1972. V.96. P. 25—31.
  26. O’Toole B., Wenderoth P. The tilt illusion: Repulsion and attraction effects in the oblique meridian // Vision Res. 1977. V. 17. P. 367—374.
  27. Prinzmetal, W., Beck, D. M. The tilt-constancy theory of visual illusions // J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 2001. V. 27. P. 206—217.
  28. Solomon J.A., Morgan M.J. Strong tilt illusions always reduce orientation acuity // Vision Res. 2009. V. 49. P. 819—824.
  29. Tolhurst D.J., Thompson P.G. Orientation illusions and aftereffects: Inhibition between channels // Vision Res. 1975. V. 15. P. 967—972.
  30. Wenderoth P., O´Connor T., Johnson S. The tilt illusion as a function of the relative and absolute lengths of test and inducing lines // Percept. Psychophys. 1986 V. 39. P. 339—345.
  31. Wilson H.R., Gelb D.J. Modified line element theory for spatial frequency and width discrimination // J. Opt. Soc. Amer. A. 1984. V. 1. P. 124—131.
  32. Wolfe J.M. Short test flashes produce large tilt aftereffects // Vision Res. 1984. V. 24. P. 1959—1964.

Information About the Authors

Valerii N. Chikhman, PhD in Engineering, Senior Research Associate, Head of Laboratory of Informational Technologies and Mathematical Modeling, Pavlov Psychological Institute of Russian Academy of Science, St.Petersburg, Russia, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4955-4608, e-mail: v_c_pavlinst@mail.ru

Valeria M. Bondarko, Doctor of Biology, Leading Research Associate, Laboratory of physiology of vision, Pavlov Institute of Physiology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, St.Petersburg, Russia, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7408-302X, e-mail: vmbond@gmail.com

Metrics

Views

Total: 479
Previous month: 16
Current month: 3

Downloads

Total: 227
Previous month: 9
Current month: 3