Literature DB >> 7651815

Local and global visual mechanisms underlying individual differences in the rod-and-frame illusion.

D Spinelli1, G Antonucci, R Daini, P Zoccolotti.   

Abstract

The role of local and global visual mechanisms in individual differences in the rod-and-frame (RF) effect was investigated. Field-dependent observes, selected on the basis of Witkin and Ash's (1948) classical procedure, were submitted to the small RF test (Coren & Holy, 1986). Four frame tilts and two gap sizes were used. As expected, direct effects (i.e., rod settings in the direction of frame tilt) were observed at small degrees of frame tilt, while indirect effects (i.e., rod settings in the direction opposite that of frame tilt) were observed at larger frame tilts. Field-dependent observers showed larger direct effects in the case of the small gap. Indirect effects were comparable in both field-dependent and field-independent subjects, regardless of gap size. Following the model proposed by Wenderoth and Johnstone (1987), these findings indicate that low-level visual mechanisms, responsible for local orientation interactions, have a different gain in field-dependent and field-independent individuals. In contrast, global visual mechanisms, presumably acting by means of long-range mechanisms, do not distinguish between these two subgroups.

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7651815     DOI: 10.3758/bf03206806

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Percept Psychophys        ISSN: 0031-5117


  19 in total

1.  Local and global mechanisms of one- and two-dimensional orientation illusions.

Authors:  P Wenderoth; R van der Zwan
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1991-10

2.  Studies in space orientation; perception of the upright with displaced visual fields.

Authors:  S E ASCH; H A WITKIN
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1948-06

3.  Spatial and orientation specific integration in the tilt illusion.

Authors:  S Johnstone; P Wenderoth
Journal:  Perception       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 1.490

4.  The different mechanisms of the direct and indirect tilt illusions.

Authors:  P Wenderoth; S Johnstone
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  Relationships between horizontal interactions and functional architecture in cat striate cortex as revealed by cross-correlation analysis.

Authors:  D Y Ts'o; C D Gilbert; T N Wiesel
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  1986-04       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Interactions between orientations in human vision.

Authors:  R H Carpenter; C Blakemore
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1973-10-26       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Eye torsion in response to a tilted visual stimulus.

Authors:  D R Goodenough; E Sigman; P K Oltman; J Rosso; H Mertz
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1979       Impact factor: 1.886

8.  The differential effects of brief exposures and surrounding contours on direct and indirect tilt illusions.

Authors:  P Wenderoth; S Johnstone
Journal:  Perception       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 1.490

9.  The gap between rod and frame influences the rod-and-frame effect with small and large inducing displays.

Authors:  P Zoccolotti; G Antonucci; D Spinelli
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1993-07

Review 10.  Stimulus specific responses from beyond the classical receptive field: neurophysiological mechanisms for local-global comparisons in visual neurons.

Authors:  J Allman; F Miezin; E McGuinness
Journal:  Annu Rev Neurosci       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 12.449

View more
  7 in total

1.  Adaptation to leftward-shifting prisms enhances local processing in healthy individuals.

Authors:  Scott A Reed; Paul Dassonville
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2014-02-19       Impact factor: 3.139

2.  Gravity dependence of the effect of optokinetic stimulation on the subjective visual vertical.

Authors:  Bryan K Ward; Christopher J Bockisch; Nicoletta Caramia; Giovanni Bertolini; Alexander Andrea Tarnutzer
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  The habitual motor vertical of humans depends on gravicentric and egocentric cues, but only little on visual cues.

Authors:  Nils Bury; Otmar Bock
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2018-06-22       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  The Two-Wrongs model explains perception-action dissociations for illusions driven by distortions of the egocentric reference frame.

Authors:  Paul Dassonville; Scott A Reed
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2015-03-18       Impact factor: 3.169

5.  Tilted frames of reference have similar effects on the perception of gravitational vertical and the planning of vertical saccadic eye movements.

Authors:  Michael Morgan; Simon Grant; Dean Melmoth; Joshua A Solomon
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2015-04-29       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  A Bayesian Account of Visual-Vestibular Interactions in the Rod-and-Frame Task.

Authors:  Bart B G T Alberts; Anouk J de Brouwer; Luc P J Selen; W Pieter Medendorp
Journal:  eNeuro       Date:  2016-11-03

Review 7.  Linking hypotheses underlying Class A and Class B methods.

Authors:  M J Morgan; D Melmoth; J A Solomon
Journal:  Vis Neurosci       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 3.241

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.