Publication: Characterizing visual asymmetries in contrast perception using shaded stimuli.
Loading...
Official URL
Full text at PDC
Publication Date
2015-12-01
Advisors (or tutors)
Editors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Scholar One
Citations
Exportar
Abstract
Previous research has shown a visual asymmetry in shaded stimuli where the perceived contrast depended on the polarity of their dark and light areas (Chacón, 2004). In particular, circles filled out with a top-dark luminance ramp were perceived with higher contrast than top-light ones although both types of stimuli had the same physical contrast. Here, using shaded stimuli, we conducted four experiments in order to find out if the perceived contrast depends on: (a) the contrast level, (b) the type of shading (continuous vs. discrete) and its degree of perceived three-dimensionality, (c) the orientation of the shading, and (d) the sign of the perceived contrast alterations. In all experiments the observers' tasks were to equate the perceived contrast of two sets of elements (usually shaded with opposite luminance polarity), in order to determine the subjective equality point. Results showed that (a) there is a strong difference in perceived contrast between circles filled out with luminance ramp top-dark and top-light that is similar for different contrast levels; (b) we also found asymmetries in contrast perception with different shaded stimuli, and this asymmetry was not related with the perceived three-dimensionality but with the type of shading, being greater for continuous-shading stimuli;
Description
UCM subjects
Unesco subjects
Keywords
Citation
Adams, W. J., Graf, E. W., & Ernst, M. O. (2004). Experience can change the ‘‘light-from-above’’ prior. Nature Neuroscience, 7(10), 1057–1058, doi.org/10.1038/nn1312.
Adelson, E. H. (1993). Perceptual organization and the judgment of brightness. Science, 262(5142), 2042– 2044.
Adelson, E. H. (2000). Lightness perception and lightness illusions. In: M. S. Gazzaniga (Ed.), The new cognitive neurosciences, 2nd ed. (pp. 339). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Aks, D. J., & Enns, J. T. (1992). Visual search for direction of shading is influenced by apparent depth. Perception & Psychophysics, 52(1), 63–74, doi.org/10.3758/BF03206760.
Bradley, R. A., & Terry, M. E. (1952). Rank analysis of incomplete block designs: I. The method of paired comparisons. Biometrika, 39, 324, doi.org/10.2307/ 2334029.
Brainard, D. H. (1997). The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433–436.
Braun, J. (1993). Shape-from-shading is independent of visual attention and may be a ‘‘texton.’’ Spatial Vision, 7(4), 311–322.
Brewster, D. (1826). On the optical illusion of the conversion of cameos into intaglios and of intaglios into cameos, with an account of other analogous phenomena. Edinburgh Journal of Science, 4(1826), 99–108.
Chacón, J. (2004). Perceived contrast explains asymmetries in visual-search tasks with shaded stimuli. Perception, 33(12), 1499–1509, doi.org/10.1068/ p5286.
David, H. A. (1988). The method of paired comparisons. London: Charles Griffin.
Enns, J. T., & Rensink, R. A. (1990). Sensitivity to three-dimensional orientation in visual search. Psychological Science, 1(5), 323–326, doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1990.tb00227.x.
García-Pérez, M. A. (1998). Forced-choice staircases with fixed step sizes: asymptotic and small-sample properties. Vision Research, 38(12), 1861–1881.
García-Pérez, M. A., & Alcalá-Quintana, R. (2005). Sampling plans for fitting the psychometric function. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 8(02), 256– 289.
García-Pérez, M. A., & Peli, E. (2001). Luminance artifacts of cathode-ray tube displays for vision research. Spatial Vision, 14(2), 201–216.
Gerardin, P., de Montalembert, M., & Mamassian, P. (2007). Shape from shading: New perspectives from the Polo Mint stimulus. Journal of Vision, 7(11), 13, 1–11, doi:10.1167/7.11.13. [PubMed] [Article]
Humphrey, G. K., Goodale, M. A., Bowen, C. V., Gati, J. S., Vilis, T., Rutt, B. K., & Menon, R. S. (1997). Differences in perceived shape from shading correlate with activity in early visual areas. Current Biology, 7(2), 144–147.
Khang, B.-K.. Kappers, A. M. L., & Koenderink, J. J. (2007). Shape from shading from images rendered with various surface types and light fields. Perception, 36(8), 1191–1213.
Kleffner, D. A., & Ramachandran, V. S. (1992). On the perception of shape from shading. Perception & Psychophysics, 52(1), 18–36, http://doi.org/10.3758/ BF03206757.
Kleiner, M., Brainard, D., and Pelli, D. (2007). What’s new in Psychtoolbox-3? Perception, 36, ECVP Abstract Supplement.
Langer, M. S., & Bu¨lthoff, H. H. (2001). A prior for global convexity in local shape-from-shading. Perception, 30(4), 403–410.
Logvinenko, A. D. (1999). Lightness induction revisited. Perception, 28, 803–816.
Mamassian, P., & Goutcher, R. (2001). Prior knowledge on the illumination position. Cognition, 81(1), B1–B9, doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(01)00116-0.
McCourt, M. E., Blakeslee, B., & Padmanabhan, G. (2013). Lighting direction and visual field modulate perceived intensity of illumination. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 983, doi.org/10.3389/ fpsyg.2013.00983.
Mingolla, E., & Todd, J. T. (1986). Perception of solid shape from shading. Biological Cybernetics, 53(3), 137–151, doi.org/10.1007/BF00342882.
Naiman, A. C., & Makous, W. (1992). Spatial nonlinearities of gray-scale CRT pixels. In SPIE/IS&T 1992 Symposium on Electronic Imaging: Science and Technology (pp. 41–56). San Jose, CA: International Society for Optics and Photonics.
Pelli, D. G. (1997). The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision, 10(4), 437–442.
Previc, F. H., & Naegele, P. D. (2001). Target-tilt and vertical-hemifield asymmetries in free-scan search for 3-D targets. Perception & Psychophysics, 63(3), 445–457.
Ramachandran, V. S. (1988). Perception of shape from shading. Nature, 331(6152), 163–166. http://doi. org/10.1038/331163a0
Reichel, F. D., & Todd, J. T. (1990). Perceived depth inversion of smoothly curved surfaces due to image orientation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16(3), 653– 664, doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.16.3.653.
Rittenhouse, D. (1786). Explanation of an optical deception. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, 2, 37–42.
Schofield, A. J., Rock, P. B., & Georgeson, M. A. (2011). Sun and sky: Does human vision assume a mixture of point and diffuse illumination when interpreting shape-from-shading? Vision Research, 51(21-22), 2317–2330.
Spiegelhalter, D., Thomas, A., Best, N., and Lunn, D. (2003). WinBUGS user manual. Version 1.4. Cambridge, UK: MRC Biostatistics Unit.
Sun, J., & Perona, P. (1996a). Early computation of shape and reflectance in the visual system. Nature, 379(6561), 165–168, doi.org/10.1038/379165a0.
Sun, J., & Perona, P. (1996b). Preattentive perception of elementary three-dimensional shapes. Vision Research, 36(16), 2515–2529, doi.org/10.1016/0042- 6989(95)00336-3.
Sun, J., & Perona, P. (1997). Shading and stereo in early perception of shape and reflectance. Perception, 26(4), 519–529.
Sun, J., & Perona, P. (1998). Where is the sun? Nature Neuroscience, 1(3), 183–184, doi.org/10.1038/630.
Symons, L. A., Cuddy, F., & Humphrey, K. (2000). Orientation tuning of shape from shading. Perception and Psychophysics, 62(3), 557–568.
Thomas, R., Nardini, M., & Mareschal, D. (2010). Interactions between ‘‘light-from-above’’ and convexity priors in visual development. Journal of Vision, 10(8), 6, 1–7, doi:10.1167/10.8.6. [PubMed] [Article]
Todd, J. T., & Mingolla, E. (1983). Perception of surface curvature and direction of illumination from patterns of shading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9(4), 583–595, doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.9.4.583.
Yonas, A., Kuskowski, M., & Sternfels, S. (1979). The role of frames of reference in the development of responsiveness to shading information. Child Development, 50(2), 495, doi.org/10.2307/1129428.