Selective adaptation with reversible figures: Don’t change that channel

An adaptation-test paradigm was used in two experiments examining processes underlying the perceived reversals of a rotating Necker cube. Adaptation and test cubes were either the same or different with respect to their visual fields of presentation (Experiment 1) or their sizes (Experiment 2). Results of both experiments indicated that, following subjects’ adaptation to a different cube, reversal rate of the test cube did not differ from that obtained without prior adaptation experience. In contrast, reversal rate of the test cube was elevated following adaptation to the same cube. Additional findings of Experiment 1 were that a test cube presented to the same visual field as the adaptation cube yielded a higher reversal rate than did a simultaneously presented cube in the opposite visual field. Also, the reversal rate of one cube was not influenced by the simultaneous presentation of a second cube. Results of both experiments were interpreted in terms of the fatigue and recovery of multiple, largely independent, localized neural channels. Thus, the results tie reversible-figure illusions to other visual phenomena thought to involve similar fatigue processes within localized visual channels (e.g., tilt, motion, and size aftereffects).

[1]  S. Magnussen,et al.  Temporal aspects of spatial adaptation. A study of the tilt aftereffect , 1986, Vision Research.

[2]  J. R. Price.  Studies of reversible perspective: A methodological review , 1968 .

[3]  D. Regan,et al.  Binocular and monocular stimuli for motion in depth: Changing-disparity and changing-size feed the same motion-in-depth stage , 1979, Vision Research.

[4]  I. Rock,et al.  The effect of knowledge of reversibility on the reversibility of ambiguous figures , 1977 .

[5]  L. Standing,et al.  Satiation Effects with Reversible Figures , 1981, Perceptual and motor skills.

[6]  S. Howard Bartley,et al.  Introduction to Perception , 1980 .

[7]  L. Maffei,et al.  Spatial Frequency Channels: Neural Mechanisms , 1978 .

[8]  D Regan,et al.  Visual Sensitivity to the Shape and Size of a Moving Object: Implications for Models of Object Perception , 1980, Perception.

[9]  L. Cohen,et al.  Rate of Apparent Change of a Necker Cube as a Function of Prior Stimulation , 1959 .

[10]  I. Rock,et al.  An introduction to perception , 1975 .

[11]  F. Attneave.  Multistability in perception. , 1971, Scientific American.

[12]  P. A. Adams,et al.  The effect of past experience on the perspective reversal of a tridimensional figure. , 1954, The American journal of psychology.

[13]  G. M. Redding,et al.  Analysis of Perspective Reversal and Associated Apparent Motions Using a Perspective-Bound Movement Illusion , 1966, Perceptual and Motor Skills.

[14]  Massimo Riani,et al.  Effects of Visual Angle on Perspective Reversal for Ambiguous Patterns , 1982, Perception.

[15]  Spatial frequency channels tuned for depth and motion , 1981, Vision Research.

[16]  John R. Price.  Effect of extended observation on reversible perspective duration , 1969 .

[17]  D. Regan.  Visual information channeling in normal and disordered vision. , 1982, Psychological review.

[18]  Janette Atkinson,et al.  Channels in Vision: Basic Aspects , 1978 .

[19]  Contrast sensitivity of the changing-size channel , 1981, Vision Research.

[20]  K. T. Brown,et al.  Rate of apparent change in a dynamic ambiguous figure as a function of observation-time. , 1955, The American journal of psychology.

[21]  J. Frisby.  Seeing: Illusion, Brain and Mind , 1979 .

[22]  L. H. Pelton,et al.  Acceleration of reversals of a Necker cube. , 1968, The American journal of psychology.

[23]  Nobuo Kawabata,et al.  Visual fixation points and depth perception , 1978, Vision Research.

[24]  VEIJO VIRSU,et al.  Determination of perspective reversals , 1975, Nature.

[25]  J. Hochberg.  Figure-ground reversal as a function of visual satiation. , 1950 .

[26]  C. W. Parkin,et al.  The Magnetism of the Moon , 1971 .

[27]  S. Palmer,et al.  Configural effects in perceived pointing of ambiguous triangles. , 1981, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[28]  R. Ammons,et al.  Experiential factors in visual form perception. I. Review and formulation of problems. , 1954, The Journal of genetic psychology.

[29]  Thomas C. Toppino,et al.  Multiple Representations of the Same Reversible Figure: Implications for Cognitive Decisional Interpretations , 1981, Perception.

[30]  Ian P. Howard,et al.  An Investigation of a Satiation Process in the Reversible Perspective of Revolving Skeletal Shapes , 1961 .

[31]  M. Grünau,et al.  The local character of perspective organization , 1984, Perception & psychophysics.

[32]  Harris Jp,et al.  How does adaptation to disparity affect the perception of reversible figures , 1980 .

[33]  R. Lipman,et al.  Some Factors Affecting Necker Cube Reversal Rate , 1962, Perceptual and motor skills.

[34]  H. Wallach,et al.  Figural aftereffects; an investigation of visual processes. , 1944 .

[35]  J G Dugger,et al.  Effect of Angle of Retinal Vision on the Rate of Fluctuation of the Necker Cube , 1968, Perceptual and motor skills.

[36]  R. Gregory.  The intelligent eye , 1970 .

[37]  R. Schumer,et al.  Independent stereoscopic channels for different extents of spatial pooling , 1979, Vision Research.

[38]  B. Gillam.  Perceived common rotary motion of ambiguous stimuli as a criterion of perceptual grouping , 1972 .

[39]  E. Boring.  Sensation and Perception. (Scientific Books: Sensation and Perception in the History of Experimental Psychology) , 1943 .

[40]  Thomas C. Toppino,et al.  As the cube turns: Evidence for two processes in the perception of a dynamic reversible figure , 1983, Perception & psychophysics.

[41]  Carlson Vr.  Satiation in a reversible perspective figure. , 1953 .

[42]  Margaret Floy Washburn,et al.  The Influence of the Size of an Outline Cube on the Fluctuations of Its Perspective , 1931 .

[43]  D. Regan,et al.  Illusory motion in depth: Aftereffect of adaptation to changing size , 1978, Vision Research.