Satiation or availability? Effects of attention, memory, and imagery on the perception of ambiguous figures

The prolonged-inspection technique has been used to demonstrate effects of satiation on the perception of ambiguous figures. We propose that the inspection phase, in which subjects view an unambiguous version of the stimulus prior to observing the ambiguous figure, does not create neural fatigue but rather provides a context in which the alternative percept is apprehended and gains perceptual strength through processes such as imagination or memory. The consequent availability of the alternative organization drives the perceptual phenomena that have been thought to reflect satiation. In Experiment 1, we demonstrated that (1) preexperimental exposure to the target figures and (2) allocation of attention to the-inspection figures-were both necessary in order to obtain results similar to those predicted by the satiation model. In Experiment 2, we obtained similar results, finding that effects of prior inspection were greater the greater the amount and availability of information regarding the alternative percept during the inspection phase. Subjects who generated visual images of the noninspected alternative during inspection yielded results comparable to those from subjects to whom both versions were presented isuaily.

[1]  P. Gorenstein,et al.  Young Supernova Remnants , 1985 .

[2]  D. Reisberg,et al.  Diverting Subjects' Concentration Slows Figural Reversals , 1984, Perception.

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

[4]  F. Simion,et al.  Comparison processes on visual mental images , 1988, Memory & cognition.

[5]  M. S. Mayzner,et al.  Cognition And Reality , 1976 .

[6]  Thomas C. Toppino,et al.  Selective adaptation with reversible figures: Don’t change that channel , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.

[7]  R. Rosenthal,et al.  Contrast Analysis: Focused Comparisons in the Analysis of Variance , 1985 .

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

[9]  J. Orbach,et al.  Reversibility of the Necker Cube: I. An Examination of the Concept of “Satiation of Orientation” , 1963, Perceptual and motor skills.

[10]  W. Köhler.  Dynamics in Psychology , 1940 .

[11]  Y. Tsal,et al.  Disambiguating Ambiguous Figures by Selective Attention , 1985 .

[12]  Irvin Rock,et al.  The effect of inattention on form perception. , 1981 .

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

[14]  M. Peterson.  Illusory concomitant motion in ambiguous stereograms: evidence for nonstimulus contributions to perceptual organization. , 1986, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[15]  A. Slater,et al.  Locus of Habituation in the Human Newborn , 1983, Perception.

[16]  R A Finke,et al.  Mental imagery and the visual system. , 1986, Scientific American.

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

[18]  William Epstein,et al.  Perceptual set as an artifact of recency. , 1960 .

[19]  Mary A. Peterson,et al.  Opposed-set measurement procedure: A quantitative analysis of the role of local cues and intention in form perception. , 1983 .

[20]  R. L. Fantz.  Visual Experience in Infants: Decreased Attention to Familiar Patterns Relative to Novel Ones , 1964, Science.

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

[22]  Kevin J. Hawley,et al.  Attention capture by novel stimuli. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

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

[24]  R M Warren,et al.  Criterion shift rule and perceptual homeostasis. , 1985, Psychological review.

[25]  Ronald Olson,et al.  Reversibility of the Necker Cube: VIII. Parts of the Figure Contributing to the Perception of Reversals , 1966 .

[26]  Marty J. Schmidt,et al.  Orientation-Specific Color Aftereffects Following Imagination. , 1977 .

[27]  J. Orbach,et al.  Reversibility of the Necker Cube: III. Effects of Interpolation on Reversal Rate of the Cube Presented Repetitively , 1963, Perceptual and motor skills.

[28]  J Hochberg,et al.  Necessary Considerations for a Theory of Form Perception: A Theoretical and Empirical Reply to Boselie and Leeuwenberg (1986) , 1989, Perception.

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

[30]  J. C. Flügel,et al.  THE INFLUENCE OF ATTENTION IN ILLUSIONS OF REVERSIBLE PERSPECTIVE , 1913 .

[31]  R. Liebert,et al.  Voluntary Control of Reversible Figures , 1985, Perceptual and motor skills.

[32]  R. Leeper.  A Study of a Neglected Portion of the Field of Learning—the Development of Sensory Organization , 1935 .

[33]  I Rock,et al.  Further Evidence of Failure of Reversal of Ambiguous Figures by Uninformed Subjects , 1992, Perception.

[34]  EFFECT OF TRAINING ON FIGURE-GROUND ORGANIZATION. , 1964, Journal of experimental psychology.

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

[36]  F. Weizmann.  Novelty, Familiarity, and the Development of Infant Attention. , 1971 .

[37]  R. Finke.  Levels of equivalence in imagery and perception. , 1980 .