Achromatic color matching as a function of apparent target orientation, target and background luminance, and lightness or brightness instructions.

Abstract

In two experiments, achromatic color matches for a fixed target, under constant illumination, were compared under conditions where the target appeared perpendicular to illumination direction and coplanar with the background (monocular viewing) and where the target appeared nonperpendicular to illumination direction and noncoplanar with the background (binocular viewing). Contrary to the coplanar ratio hypothesis, which predicts a “lightening” of the target seen coplanar with a darker background, a general “darkening” of the target occurred for both white (N9.5/) and black (N3/) backgrounds and for both dark (N5.5/) and light (N6.5/) targets. This darkening effect was greatest for the darker target and black background, and approximately equal for other combinations of target value and background. The direction of the darkening effect is consistent with the albedo hypothesis, which assumes an inferential correction for changes in conditions of illumination. However, variation in the magnitude of the darkening effect is problematical, and cannot be easily explained by any existing theory. In both experiments, instructions to judge “lightness” or “brightness” failed to produce any substantial differences in performance, although postexperimental questioning suggested that subjects had a verbal understanding of these concepts. Apparently, under reduction conditions, subjects lack cues to illumination and make only lightness matches, regardless of instructions.