Perception

Recent studies of texture segmentation and second-order vision have proposed very similar models for the detection of orientation modulation and contrast modulation (OM and CM). From the similarity of the models it is tempting to assume that the two cues might be processed by a single generalised texture mechanism; however, recent results (Kingdom et al, 2003 Visual Neuroscience 2 65–76) have suggested that these cues are detected independently, or at least in a mechanism that is able to maintain an apparent independence between the cues. We tested new combinations of OM and CM and found that CM at 0.4 cycle deg⁻¹ facilitates the detection of OM at 0.2 cycle deg⁻¹ when the peaks of contrast align with the extremes of orientation. There is also some evidence of weak facilitation of CM by OM under the same conditions. Further, this facilitation can be predicted by filter-rectify-filter channels optimised for the detection of each cue, adding weight to the argument that texture cues are processed in a single generalised mechanism that nonetheless achieves cue independence or near-independence in many circumstances. We also found that the amount of suprathreshold masking produced by an orientation cue depends on the overall percept formed by that cue.

Grating induction is a brightness effect in which a counterphase spatial brightness variation (a grating) is induced in a homogeneous test strip that is surrounded by an inducing luminance grating (McCourt, 1982 Vision Research 22 119–134). Moulden and Kingdom (1991 Vision Research 31 1999–2008) introduced an interesting variant of grating induction (sometimes referred to as gradient induction) in which multiple strips of either a linear luminance ramp or a sine-wave grating were interlaced with strips of homogeneous luminance. We (Blakeslee and McCourt, 1999 Vision Research 39 4361–4377) demonstrated that a simple multiscale filtering explanation could account for grating induction. Recently, however, Logvinenko (2003 Perception 32 621–626) presented several arguments impugning the adequacy of spatial filtering approaches to understanding brightness induction in gradient induction stimuli. We propose that Logvinenko's arguments apply only to a limited class of filtering models, specifically those which employ only a single spatial filter. To test this hypothesis we modeled gradient induction stimuli as a function of inducing contrast, as well as Logvinenko's (2003) remote induction stimulus, using our multiscale oriented difference-of-Gaussians (ODOG) model (Blakeslee and McCourt 1999). The ODOG model successfully predicts the appearance of the inducing strips and the homogeneous test strips in the gradient induction stimuli and the appearance of the test patches in the remote induction stimuli. These results refute Logvinenko's (2003) claims, and we interpret them as providing strong evidence for a multiscale filtering approach to understanding both gradient induction and remote brightness induction effects.

When our visual system is confronted with ambiguous stimuli, the perceptual interpretation spontaneously alternates between the competing incompatible interpretations. The timing of such perceptual alternations is highly stochastic and the underlying neural mechanisms are poorly understood. We show that perceptual alternations can be triggered by a transient stimulus presented nearby. The induction was tested for four types of bistable stimuli: structure-from-motion, binocular rivalry, Necker cube, and ambiguous apparent motion. While underlying mechanisms may vary among them, a transient flash induced time-locked perceptual alternations in all cases. The effect showed a dependence on the adaptation to the dominant percept prior to the presentation of a flash. These perceptual alternations show many similarities to perceptual disappearances induced by transient stimuli (Kanai and Kamitani, 2003 Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 15 664–672; Moradi and Shimojo, 2004 Vision Research 44 449–460). Mechanisms linking these two transient-induced phenomena are discussed.

We studied ‘crowding’ in the parafovea using orientation identification of a Gabor target as the task, and flanking Gabors on an isoeccentric circle as distractors. Orientation-discrimination thresholds were raised by nearby flanking distractors. This crowding effect was increased by the number of distractors and decreased by the spatial separation between target and distractors. Crowding was greatest when the target was in the centre of the distractor array and smallest when the target was on the edge of the array. A cue indicating the position of the target improved performance when the position was otherwise unknown and the spatial separation between target and distractors was large, but the cue had no significant effect when separation was small. Increasing the contrast of the target relative to the distractors reduced crowding, but targets of smaller contrast than that of the distractors are even harder to identify than those of the same contrast. Putting the target and distractors in different depth planes decreased crowding for some observers, but there were qualitative individual differences. A large (say, 45°) difference in orientation between target and distractors caused the target to ‘pop out’ in a presence/absence task, despite the evidence from other studies that crowding is still found in these conditions. We conclude that salience has, at best, modest effects on crowding.

We investigated how subjects used their knowledge of biomechanical constraints when judging whether different items were in balance or in the process of falling, as a function of their angle of slant. In the first experiment, the stimuli were pictures of postures of a human body, of a wooden mannequin, and of a skeleton. The results show that for these 3 items, fall responses appeared for a smaller slant angle for a backward slant than for a forward one. This difference may reflect the influence of biomechanical constraints. To verify whether the asymmetry of the responses to the mannequin and the skeleton was genuine or due to some semantic context effect, a second experiment was run with only pictures of a wooden mannequin. The same asymmetry was observed. In a third experiment, falling judgments were obtained for pictures of a human body and of a structurally comparable artifactual object. The asymmetry of the fall responses appeared only for the human body.

Although the Ebbinghaus illusion is commonly used as an example of a simple size-contrast effect, previous studies have emphasised its complexity by identifying many factors that potentially influence the magnitude of the illusion. Here, in a series of three experiments, we attempt to simplify this complexity. In each trial, subjects saw a display comprising, on one side, a target stimulus surrounded by inducers and, on the other, an isolated probe stimulus. Their task was to indicate whether the probe appeared larger or smaller than the target. Probe size was adjusted with a one-up, one-down staircase procedure to find the point of subjective equality between probe and target. From these experiments, we argue that the apparent effects of inducer size are often confounded by the relative completeness of the inducing surround and that factors such as the similarity of the inducers and target are secondary. We suggest a simple model that can explain most of the data in terms of just two primary and independent factors: the relative size of the inducers and target, and the distance between the inducers and the target. The balance between these two factors determines whether the size of the target is underestimated or overestimated.

We tested the effects of using a prosthesis for substitution of vision with audition (PSVA) on sensitivity to the Ponzo illusion. The effects of visual experience on the susceptibility to this illusion were also assessed. In one experiment, both early-blind and blindfolded sighted volunteers used the PSVA to explore several variants of the Ponzo illusion as well as control stimuli. No effects of the illusion were observed. The results indicate that subjects focused their attention on the two central horizontal bars of the stimuli, without processing the contextual cues that convey perspective in the Ponzo figure. In a second experiment, we required subjects to use the PSVA to consider the two converging oblique lines of the stimuli before comparing the length of the two horizontal bars. Here we were able to observe susceptibility to the Ponzo illusion in the sighted group, but to a lesser extent than in a sighted non-PSVA control group. No clear effect of the ilusion was obtained in early-blind subjects. These results suggest that, at least in sighted subjects, perception obtained with the PSVA shares perceptual processes with vision. Visual experience appears mandatory for a Ponzo illusion to occur with the PSVA.

We studied human haptic perception of sine-wave gratings. In the first experiment we measured the dependence of amplitude detection thresholds on the number of cycles and on the wavelength of the gratings. In haptic perception of sine-wave gratings, the results are in agreement with neural summation. The rate at which detection thresholds decrease with increasing number of cycles is much higher than can be accounted for by probability summation alone. Further, neural summation mechanisms describe the detection thresholds accurately over the whole spatial range probed in the experiment, that is wavelengths from 14 mm up to 225 mm. Earlier, we found a power-law dependence of thresholds on the spatial width of Gaussian profiles (Louw et al, 2000 Experimental Brain Research 132 369–374). The current results extend these findings; the power-law dependence holds not only for Gaussian profiles, but also for a broad range of sine-wave gratings with the number of cycles varying between 1 and 8. Haptic perception involves tactual scanning combined with an active, dynamic exploration of the environment. We measured characteristics of the velocity and force with which stimuli were scanned while performing a psychophysical task. One particularly surprising finding was that, without being instructed, participants maintained an almost constant scanning velocity during each 45-min session. A constant velocity in successive trials of the experiment might facilitate or even be necessary for discrimination. Further, a large systematic dependence of velocity on scanning length was found. An eightfold increase in scanning length resulted in about a fourfold increase in scanning velocity. A second experiment was conducted to study the influence of scanning velocity on psychophysical detection thresholds. This was done by systematically imposing specific scanning velocities to the participants while the thresholds were measured. The main result of the second experiment was that psychophysical detection thresholds are constant over a relatively broad range of scanning velocities.