Abstract
There is debate as to whether or not the Ebbinghaus illusion is driven by high-level cognitive size contrast mechanisms as opposed to low-level biphasic contour interactions. In this study, we examine the variability in effects that are shared between this illusion and a different illusion that cannot be explained logically by a size contrast account. This comparison revealed that nearly one quarter of the variability for one illusion is shared with the other - demonstrating how a size-contrast account cannot be the sole explanation for the Ebbinghaus illusion.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
