Ebbinghaus Illusion Research Articles

Perception of contextual size illusions by honeybees in restricted and unrestricted viewing conditions.

How different visual systems process images and make perceptual errors can inform us about cognitive and visual processes. One of the strongest geometric errors in perception is a misperception of size depending on the size of surrounding objects, known as the Ebbinghaus or Titchener illusion. The ability to perceive the Ebbinghaus illusion appears to vary dramatically among vertebrate species, and even populations, but this may depend on whether the viewing distance is restricted. We tested whether honeybees perceive contextual size illusions, and whether errors in perception of size differed under restricted and unrestricted viewing conditions. When the viewing distance was unrestricted, there was an effect of context on size perception and thus, similar to humans, honeybees perceived contrast size illusions. However, when the viewing distance was restricted, bees were able to judge absolute size accurately and did not succumb to visual illusions, despite differing contextual information. Our results show that accurate size perception depends on viewing conditions, and thus may explain the wide variation in previously reported findings across species. These results provide insight into the evolution of visual mechanisms across vertebrate and invertebrate taxa, and suggest convergent evolution of a visual processing solution.

Visual Illusions Affect Motor Performance, But not Learning in Highly Skilled Shooters

Enhanced expectancies are an important component of OPTIMAL theory and are thought to contribute to motor performance and learning. There is limited information, however, on the generalizability of OPTIMAL theory to highly skilled individuals. The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of visual illusions, specifically an Ebbinghaus illusion, on the performance and learning of an aiming task using highly skilled 10-m rifle and pistol shooters. Two groups of shooters with international experience were recruited and practiced with perceived larger and smaller targets. Our results indicated that participants who perceived the target larger reported higher self-efficacy immediately after practice. In addition, these participants had higher shooting performance during practice. Our retention test (24 hours later), however, did not produce differences in self-efficacy or shooting performance. Our data suggests that visual illusions are beneficial for motor performance in highly skilled shooters, but may not affect learning in those who are in the latter stages of learning. Further studies should continue examining the role of visual illusions for enhancing expectancies in highly skilled and experienced performers.

Enhancing performance expectancies through visual illusions facilitates motor learning in children

In a recent study by Chauvel, Wulf, and Maquestiaux (2015), golf putting performance was found to be affected by the Ebbinghaus illusion. Specifically, adult participants demonstrated more effective learning when they practiced with a hole that was surrounded by small circles, making it look larger, than when the hole was surrounded by large circles, making it look smaller. The present study examined whether this learning advantage would generalize to children who are assumed to be less sensitive to the visual illusion. Two groups of 10-year olds practiced putting golf balls from a distance of 2m, with perceived larger or smaller holes resulting from the visual illusion. Self-efficacy was increased in the group with the perceived larger hole. The latter group also demonstrated more accurate putting performance during practice. Importantly, learning (i.e., delayed retention performance without the illusion) was enhanced in the group that practiced with the perceived larger hole. The findings replicate previous results with adult learners and are in line with the notion that enhanced performance expectancies are key to optimal motor learning (Wulf & Lewthwaite, 2016).

The Ebbinghaus illusion in the gray bamboo shark (Chiloscyllium griseum) in comparison to the teleost damselfish (Chromis chromis)

This is the first study to comparatively assess the perception of the Ebbinghaus-Titchener circles and variations of the Delboeuf illusion in four juvenile bamboo sharks (Chiloscyllium griseum) and five damselfish (Chromis chromis) using identical training paradigms. We aimed to investigate whether these two species show similarities in the perceptual integration of local elements into the global context. The Ebbinghaus-Titchener circles consist of two equally sized central test circles surrounded by smaller or larger circles of different size, number and/or distance. During training, sharks and damselfish learned to distinguish a large circle from a small circle, regardless (i) of its gray level and (ii) of the presence of surrounding circles arranged along an outer semi-circle. During the subsequent transfer period, individuals were presented with variations of the Ebbinghaus-Titchener circles and the Delboeuf illusion. Similar to adult humans, dolphins, or some birds, damselfish tended to judge the test circle surrounded by smaller inducers as larger than the one surrounded by larger inducers (contrast effect). However, sharks significantly preferred the overall larger figure or chose indifferently between both alternatives (assimilation effect). These contrasting responses point towards potential differences in perceptual processing mechanisms, such as ‘filling-in’ or ‘(a)modal completion’, ‘perceptual grouping’, and ‘local’ or ‘global’ visual perception. The present study provides intriguing insights into the perceptual abilities of phylogenetically distant taxa separated in evolutionary time by 200 million years.

Susceptibility to Ebbinghaus and M\xfcller-Lyer illusions in autistic children: a comparison of three different methods

BackgroundStudies reporting altered susceptibility to visual illusions in autistic individuals compared to that typically developing individuals have been taken to reflect differences in perception (e.g. reduced global processing), but could instead reflect differences in higher-level decision-making strategies.MethodsWe measured susceptibility to two contextual illusions (Ebbinghaus, Müller-Lyer) in autistic children aged 6–14 years and typically developing children matched in age and non-verbal ability using three methods. In experiment 1, we used a new two-alternative-forced-choice method with a roving pedestal designed to minimise cognitive biases. Here, children judged which of two comparison stimuli was most similar in size to a reference stimulus. In experiments 2 and 3, we used methods previously used with autistic populations. In experiment 2, children judged whether stimuli were the ‘same’ or ‘different’, and in experiment 3, we used a method-of-adjustment task.ResultsAcross all tasks, autistic children were equally susceptible to the Ebbinghaus illusion as typically developing children. Autistic children showed a heightened susceptibility to the Müller-Lyer illusion, but only in the method-of-adjustment task. This result may reflect differences in decisional criteria.ConclusionsOur results are inconsistent with theories proposing reduced contextual integration in autism and suggest that previous reports of altered susceptibility to illusions may arise from differences in decision-making, rather than differences in perception per se. Our findings help to elucidate the underlying reasons for atypical responses to perceptual illusions in autism and call for the use of methods that reduce cognitive bias when measuring illusion susceptibility.

Interplay between the Ebbinghaus illusion and hierarchical coding in visual working memory

Interplay between the Ebbinghaus illusion and hierarchical coding in visual working memory

The effects of motion dynamics on the Ebbinghaus and Corridor illusions

The effects of motion dynamics on the Ebbinghaus and Corridor illusions

The functional subdivision of the visual brain: Is there a real illusion effect on action? A multi-lab replication study

It has often been suggested that visual illusions affect perception but not actions such as grasping, as predicted by the “two-visual-systems” hypothesis of Milner and Goodale (1995, The Visual Brain in Action, Oxford University press). However, at least for the Ebbinghaus illusion, relevant studies seem to reveal a consistent illusion effect on grasping (Franz & Gegenfurtner, 2008. Grasping visual illusions: consistent data and no dissociation. Cognitive Neuropsychology). Two interpretations are possible: either grasping is not immune to illusions (arguing against dissociable processing mechanisms for vision-for-perception and vision-for-action), or some other factors modulate grasping in ways that mimic a vision-for perception effect in actions. It has been suggested that one such factor may be obstacle avoidance (Haffenden Schiff & Goodale, 2001. The dissociation between perception and action in the Ebbinghaus illusion: nonillusory effects of pictorial cues on grasp. Current Biology, 11, 177–181). In four different labs (total N = 144), we conducted an exact replication of previous studies suggesting obstacle avoidance mechanisms, implementing conditions that tested grasping as well as multiple perceptual tasks. This replication was supplemented by additional conditions to obtain more conclusive results. Our results confirm that grasping is affected by the Ebbinghaus illusion and demonstrate that this effect cannot be explained by obstacle avoidance.

Attractive Contours of the Ebbinghaus Illusion

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.

Dissociating early and late visual processing via the Ebbinghaus illusion

Visual perception is not instantaneous; the perceptual representation of our environment builds up over time. This can strongly affect our responses to visual stimuli. Here, we study the temporal dynamics of visual processing by analyzing the time course of priming effects induced by the well-known Ebbinghaus illusion. In slower responses, Ebbinghaus primes produce effects in accordance with their perceptual appearance. However, in fast responses, these effects are reversed. We argue that this dissociation originates from the difference between early feedforward-mediated gist of the scene processing and later feedback-mediated more elaborate processing. Indeed, our findings are well explained by the differences between low-frequency representations mediated by the fast magnocellular pathway and high-frequency representations mediated by the slower parvocellular pathway. Our results demonstrate the potentially dramatic effect of response speed on the perception of visual illusions specifically and on our actions in response to objects in our visual environment generally.

Seeing the Big Picture: Size Perception Is More Context Sensitive in the Presence of Others.

This paper tests the hypothesis that social presence influences size perception by increasing context sensitivity. Consistent with Allport’s prediction, we expected to find greater context sensitivity in participants who perform a visual task in the presence of other people (i.e., in co-action) than in participants who perform the task in isolation. Supporting this hypothesis, participants performing an Ebbinghaus illusion-based task in co-action showed greater size illusions than those performing the task in isolation. Specifically, participants in a social context had greater difficulty perceiving the correct size of a target circle and ignoring its surroundings. Analyses of delta plot functions suggest a mechanism of interference monitoring, since that when individuals take longer to respond, they are better able to ignore the surrounding circles. However, this type of monitoring interference was not moderated by social presence. We discuss how this lack of moderation might be the reason why the impact of social presence on context sensitivity is able to be detected in tasks such as the Ebbinghaus illusion.

Visual context processing dysfunctions in youth at high risk for psychosis: Resistance to the Ebbinghaus illusion and its symptom and social and role functioning correlates.

Impaired visual context processing is closely linked with expression of symptoms in people with psychosis. However, to date, there have been no investigations of this phenomenon in the critical ultra high-risk (UHR) period immediately preceding the onset of psychosis. In total, 73 participants (33 UHR, 40 control) were evaluated with clinical and global functioning interviews and with a computerized task that required comparing the size of 2 target circles. Targets could appear by themselves (no-context condition), or within a context that made size judgment easier (helpful condition) or more difficult (misleading condition). Susceptibility to illusion was measured as the accuracy differences between the no-context and the helpful (i.e., helpful-index) and the misleading (i.e., misleading-index) conditions. Both groups exhibited approximately the same percentage of accurate responses to the no-context condition. However, the UHR subjects exhibited significantly less susceptibility to the illusion, performing superior to controls on the misleading index. The UHR group also showed less susceptibility on the helpful index, but this was not significant. Lower susceptibility on the misleading index was associated with increased negative symptoms and role functioning at a trend level. Lower susceptibility on the helpful index was significantly associated with increased negative symptoms and both poor role and social functioning. These results indicate that visual context processing is impaired during the UHR period, and is related to core illness features, suggesting that this task may be a useful biomarker in studies of UHR participants.

Memory plays tricks on me: Perceptual bias induced by memory reactivated size in Ebbinghaus illusion

The relationship between perceptual and memory processing is at the core of cognition. Growing evidence suggests reciprocal influences between them so that memory features should lead to an actual perceptual bias. In the present study, we investigate the reciprocal influence of perceptual and memory processing by further adapting the Ebbinghaus illusion and tested it in a psychophysical design. In a 2AFC (two-alternative forced choice) paradigm, the perceptual bias in the Ebbinghaus illusion was induced by a physical size (Experiment 1) or a memory reactivated size of the inducers (Experiment 2, the size was reactivated thanks to a color–size association). One test disk was presented on the left of the screen and was surrounded by six inducers with a large or small (perceptual or reactivated) size. The test disk varied in size and participants were asked to indicate whether this test disk was smaller or larger than a reference disk presented on the right of the screen (the reference disk was invariant in size). Participants' responses were influenced by the size of the inducers for the perceptual and the reactivated size of the inducers. These results provide new evidence for the influence of memory on perception in a psychophysics paradigm.

Is the Ebbinghaus illusion a size contrast illusion

The Ebbinghaus illusion, in which a central target surrounded by larger context figures looks smaller than when surrounded by smaller context figures, is usually classified as a illusion. Thus size contrast is the dominant account of this effect. However, according to an alternative account this phenomenon has little to do with but is rather caused by distance-dependent attractive and repulsive interactions between neural representation of contours. Here evidence is presented against the account and consistent with the contour interaction account. Experiment 1 was a control study confirming that the illusion can be obtained using displays consisting only of squares, which are more convenient to manipulate than the standardly used circles. In Experiment 2, the standard configuration involving small context figures surrounding the target was compared to a novel configuration, which involved many small context figures. The illusory effect of the standard context was stronger than the illusory effect of the spread context, in accord with the prediction of the contour interaction account, and contrary to the prediction of the account. In Experiment 3 two novel configurations were used, based on standard and spread contexts. The results were in accord with the prediction of the contour interaction account, whereas the account had no prediction because the stimuli did not involve conventional contrast. Additional aspects of the stimuli and an account of the illusion based on a perspective interpretation are also discussed.

Do children with autism show reduced susceptibility to the Ebbinghaus illusion?

Do children with autism show reduced susceptibility to the Ebbinghaus illusion?

How preparation to touch or grasp alters visual size perception.

Prior studies have suggested that visually guided actions are resistant to the effects of some pictorial size illusions, e.g., the maximum grip aperture component of a grasp for an element of the Ebbinghaus illusion display. We present evidence that when participants prepare to grasp, the reduction in illusion magnitude observed for action components is also present for conscious perceptual judgments. Our studies characterize how visual size perception changes when we choose to engage in different size-mediated behaviors. Even when the stimuli used were identical for two different tasks, we found that available information was processed differently. In the studies, participants always selected which of the two targets was larger. In some conditions, the context in which the targets were presented induced a visual illusion of size. We varied the sizes of target pairs to assess the magnitude of these visual illusions. In some tasks, participants indicated their size choice verbally. For other tasks, participants reached to grasp or touch the target that they perceived as larger. Illusion magnitudes were smaller when participants engaged in actions directed at a target or when participants imagined performing those actions. This shift in visual processing persisted for several minutes after participants switched back to a verbal, non-grasping, non-touch task. A motor interference task eliminated the reduction in illusion magnitude.

The Brain Morphometric Mechanism of Ebbinghaus Illusion and Its Relationship to Impulsiveness

Ebbinghaus illusion is a typical size illusion. However, the neural mechanism of this illusion is still elusive. Previous studies mainly focused on the role of human early visual cortex and ventral pathway on Ebbinghaus illusion by using the method of fMRI. Till now, there are few studies on the brain morphometric basis of Ebbinghaus illusion. In addition, as a robust illusion, the relationship of Ebbinghaus illusion and human personality is worth studying. The current study investigated the neural mechanism of Ebbinghaus illusion and its relationship to human personality. We found that the effect of Ebbinghaus illusion was positively correlated to the regional gray matter volume of left orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) and left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC); the effect of Ebbinghaus illusion was negatively correlated to the total score of Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS); impulsiveness mediated the relationship between left OFC and Ebbinghaus illusion. The results revealed that, as a stable characteristic of individuals, impulsiveness plays an important role in the generation of Ebbinghaus illusion. Our study is the first attempt to investigate the mechanism of visual illusion based on personality and brain morphometry. It advances our knowledge of visual processing and has potential practical significance.

Rescaling retinal size into perceived size: evidence for an occipital and parietal bottleneck.

The spatial and temporal context of an object influence its perceived size. Two visual illusions illustrate this nicely: the size adaptation effect and the Ebbinghaus illusion. Whereas size adaptation affects size rescaling of a target circle via a previously presented, differently sized adaptor circle, the Ebbinghaus illusion alters perceived size by virtue of surrounding circles. In the classical Ebbinghaus setting, the surrounding circles are shown simultaneously with the target. However, size underestimation persists when the surrounding circles precede the target. Such a temporal separation of inducer and target circles in both illusions permits the comparison of BOLD signals elicited by two displays that, although objectively identical, elicit different percepts. The current study combined both illusions in a factorial design to identify a presumed common central mechanism involved in rescaling retinal into perceived size. At the behavioral level, combining both illusions did not affect perceived size further. At the neural level, however, this combination induced functional activation beyond that induced by either illusion separately: An underadditive activation pattern was found within left lingual gyrus, right supramarginal gyrus, and right superior parietal cortex. These findings provide direct behavioral and functional evidence for the presence of a neural bottleneck in rescaling retinal into perceived size, a process vital for visual perception.

Comparison of visual perceptual organization in schizophrenia and body dysmorphic disorder

People with schizophrenia are impaired at organizing potentially ambiguous visual information into well-formed shape and object representations. This perceptual organization (PO) impairment has not been found in other psychiatric disorders. However, recent data on body dysmorphic disorder (BDD), suggest that BDD may also be characterized by reduced PO. Similarities between these groups could have implications for understanding the RDoC dimension of visual perception in psychopathology, and for modeling symptom formation across these two conditions. We compared patients with SCZ (n=24) to those with BDD (n=20), as well as control groups of obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) patients (n=20) and healthy controls (n=20), on two measures of PO that have been reliably associated with schizophrenia-related performance impairment. On both the contour integration and Ebbinghaus illusion tests, only the SCZ group demonstrated abnormal performance relative to controls; the BDD group performed similarly to the OCD and CON groups. In addition, on both tasks, the SCZ group performed more abnormally than the BDD group. Overall, these data suggest that PO reductions observed in SCZ are not present in BDD. Visual processing impairments in BDD may arise instead from other perceptual disturbances or attentional biases related to emotional factors.

The Dynamic Ebbinghaus: motion dynamics greatly enhance the classic contextual size illusion.

The Ebbinghaus illusion is a classic example of the influence of a contextual surround on the perceived size of an object. Here, we introduce a novel variant of this illusion called the Dynamic Ebbinghaus illusion in which the size and eccentricity of the surrounding inducers modulates dynamically over time. Under these conditions, the size of the central circle is perceived to change in opposition with the size of the inducers. Interestingly, this illusory effect is relatively weak when participants are fixating a stationary central target, less than half the magnitude of the classic static illusion. However, when the entire stimulus translates in space requiring a smooth pursuit eye movement to track the target, the illusory effect is greatly enhanced, almost twice the magnitude of the classic static illusion. A variety of manipulations including target motion, peripheral viewing, and smooth pursuit eye movements all lead to dramatic illusory effects, with the largest effect nearly four times the strength of the classic static illusion. We interpret these results in light of the fact that motion-related manipulations lead to uncertainty in the image size representation of the target, specifically due to added noise at the level of the retinal input. We propose that the neural circuits integrating visual cues for size perception, such as retinal image size, perceived distance, and various contextual factors, weight each cue according to the level of noise or uncertainty in their neural representation. Thus, more weight is given to the influence of contextual information in deriving perceived size in the presence of stimulus and eye motion. Biologically plausible models of size perception should be able to account for the reweighting of different visual cues under varying levels of certainty.