Evidence Relating Subjective Contours and Interpretations Involving Interposition

Subjective contours, according to one theory, outline surfaces that are apparently interposed between the viewer and background (because of the disruption of background figures, sudden termination of lines, and other interposition ‘cues’) but are not explicitly outlined by intensity discontinuities. This theory predicts that if the cues are not interpreted as evidence of interposition, no intervening surface need be postulated, hence no subjective contours would be seen. This prediction, however, is difficult to test because observers normally interpret the cues as interposition evidence and normally see the subjective contours. Tests are reported on a patient with visual agnosia who is unable to make the usual interposition interpretations and unable to see subjective contours, but has normal ability to interpret standard visual illusions, stereograms, and in particular, stereogram versions of the standard subjective contour figures, which elicit to him strong subjective edges in depth (corresponding to the subjective contours viewed in the monocular versions of the figures).

[1]  W. L. Brigner,et al.  Subjective Contour: Apparent Depth or Simultaneous Brightness Contrast? , 1974, Perceptual and motor skills.

[2]  R. Lawson,et al.  Stereopsis and anomalous contour. , 1967, Vision research.

[3]  S. Coren,et al.  Subjective contour: The inadequacy of brightness contrast as an explanation , 1975 .

[4]  C. Cavonius.  Ambiguous cognitive contours , 1976, Nature.

[5]  J. Kennedy,et al.  A Figure-Density Hypothesis and Illusory Contour Brightness , 1976, Perception.

[6]  J. Frisby,et al.  Illusory Contours: Curious Cases of Simultaneous Brightness Contrast? , 1975 .

[7]  S. Coren,et al.  SUBJECTIVE CONTOURS AND APPARENT DEPTH , 2005 .

[8]  G. Kanizsa.  Subjective contours. , 1976, Scientific American.

[9]  R. Gregory,et al.  Cognitive Contours , 1972, Nature.

[10]  E M Brussell,et al.  Sensory information and subjective contour. , 1977, The American journal of psychology.

[11]  R. L. Gregory,et al.  Illusory contours and stereo depth , 1974 .

[12]  D Marr,et al.  Early processing of visual information. , 1976, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[13]  I. Rock,et al.  Illusory Contours as the Solution to a Problem , 1979, Perception.

[14]  S. Coren.  Brightness contrast as a function of figure-ground relations. , 1969, Journal of experimental psychology.

[15]  H. Gardner,et al.  Visual Agnosia in an Artist , 1978, Cortex.

[16]  J. Frisby,et al.  Some New Subjective Contours in Random-Line Stereograms , 1975 .

[17]  ARTHUR P. GINSBURG,et al.  Is the illusory triangle physical or imaginary? , 1975, Nature.

[18]  L. Festinger,et al.  The effect of attention on brightness contrast and assimilation. , 1970, The American journal of psychology.

[19]  T. Shipley.  Visual Contours in Homogeneous Space , 1965, Science.

[20]  S Blomfield.  Implicit features and stereoscopy. , 1973, Nature: New biology.

[21]  L. Glass.  Moiré Effect from Random Dots , 1969, Nature.

[22]  D R Bradley,et al.  Organizational determinants of subjective contour: the subjective Necker cube. , 1977, The American journal of psychology.