We combine a convex facial mask with a concave torso—or vice versa—thus creating a single rigid object with a transition area at the neck, where convexity changes to concavity. This combination creates stunning illusions when the rigid object is set to motion. The two simplest effects are (1) when the object is rotated about its axis, the head appears to twist with respect to the torso, as in “The Exorcist” film (2) when it is rotated around an axis parallel to the shoulders, the head appears to hinge around the torso. More complex illusory effects result from more complex motions. The involvement of higher-level perceptual processes may account for the illusory effects.
CookN. D.HayashiT.AmemiyaT.SuzukiK., & LeumannL. (2002). Effects of visual-field inversions on the reverse-perspective illusion. Perception, 31, 1147–1151. doi:10.1068/p3336
2.
The Exorcist. (1973). Film directed by William Friedkin, “head-turning.” scene, Warner Bros. USA
3.
GogelW. C. (1990). A theory of phenomenal geometry and its applications. Perception and Psychophysics, 48, 105–123. doi:10.3758/BF03207077
4.
GregoryR. L. (1970). The intelligent eye (128–131). New York: McGraw-Hill
5.
GregoryR. L. (1997). Knowledge in perception and illusion. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society London B, 352, 1121–1126. doi:10.1098/rstb.1997.0095
6.
GregoryR. L. (2005). The Medawar Lecture 2001 knowledge for vision: Vision for knowledge. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society London B, 360(1458), 1231–1251. doi:10.1098/rstb.2005.1662
7.
HelmholtzH. (1962/1866). Treatise on physiological optics. New York: Dover/Handbuch der Physiologischen Optik. vol. 3 (Voss)
8.
HillH., & BruceV. (1993). Independent effects of lighting, orientation, and stereo on the hollow face illusion. Perception, 22, 887–897. doi:10.1068/p220887
9.
HillH., & BruceV. (1994). A comparison between the hollow-face and “hollow-potato” illusions. Perception, 23, 1335–1337. doi:10.1068/p231335
10.
HillH., & JohnstonA. (2007). The hollow-face illusion: object-specific knowledge, general assumptions or properties of the stimulus?Perception, 36, 199–223. doi:10.1068/p5523
11.
JohanssonG. (1973). Visual perception of biological motion and a model for its analysis. Perception & Psychophysics, 14, 201–211. doi:10.3758/BF03212378
12.
KoenderinkJ. J.van DoornA. J.KappersA. M. L., & ToddJ. T. (2004). Pointing out of the picture. Perception, 33, 513–530. doi:10.1068/p3454
13.
PapathomasT. V. (2007). Art pieces that “move” in our minds—An explanation of illusory motion based on depth reversal. Spatial Vision, 21, 79–95. doi:10.1163/156856807782753958
14.
RockI. (1983). The logic of perception. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
15.
RogersB. J., & GyaniA. (2010). Binocular disparities, motion parallax, and geometric perspective in Patrick Hughes's “reverspectives”: Theoretical analysis and empirical findings. Perception, 39, 33000348. doi:10.1068/p6583
16.
UllmanS. (1984). Maximizing rigidity: The incremental recovery of 3-D structure from rigid and rubbery motion. Perception, 13, 255–274. doi:10.1068/p130255
