Expectation and satiation accounts of ambiguous figure-ground perception

Abstract

An expectancy account of figure-ground shifts, promoted as an alternative to satiation theory, was tested. One-hundred and three subjects in six conditions (Experiment 1) were either informed or uninformed about 12 to 13 ambiguous figures, and had either unlimited time or 30 sec in which to respond. In two of the conditions, head and eye movements were restricted, and in one condition, incidental learning was used. In keeping with an expectancy view, uninformed subjects saw fewer meaningful shapes than informed subjects did, and restricted eye/head movements played no role. However, in accord with a satiation view, most figures did shift for many subjects. Unexpected for both accounts, inspection time was not a factor. In Experiment 2, 59 uninformed subjects saw two ambiguous figures whose alternative shapes were physically emphasized in order to increase both attention and satiation. Contrary to satiation expectations, but supporting an expectancy position, subjects saw one shape as often as two. The applicability of inherent stimulus factors to figure-ground perception was discussed.