Brightness-the perception of an object's luminance-arises from complex and poorly understood interactions at several levels of processing 1 . It is well known that the brightness of an object depends on its spatial context 2 , which can include perceptual organization 3 , scene interpretation 4 , three-dimensional interpretation 5 , shadows 6 , and other high-level percepts. Here we present a new class of illusion in which temporal relations with spatially neighbouring objects can modulate a target object's brightness. When compared with a nearby patch of constant luminance, a brief flash appears brighter with increasing onset asynchrony. Simultaneous contrast, retinal effects, masking, apparent motion and attentional effects cannot account for this illusory enhancement of brightness. This temporal context effect indicates that two parallel streams-one adapting and one nonadapting-encode brightness in the visual cortex.We report here a novel illusion in which temporal relationships affect brightness perception. Two flashes appeared on either side of a fixation point: one was brief (56 ms), the other long (278 ms; Fig. 1a). Observers reported which flash appeared brighter. When flashes of identical luminance had simultaneous onset, subjects reported that the brief flash looked dimmer than the long flash (Fig. 1b). This was expected from the Broca-Sulzer effect, in which a flash of brief duration looks dimmer than a physically identical flash presented for a longer duration 7 .However, when the two flashes had simultaneous offset, the brief flash appeared brighter ( Fig. 1b; t = −5.32, P = 0.0009). This surprising brightness enhancement averaged 30% and was seen by all observers tested. When the brief flash occurred at intermediate times (between onset and offset of the long flash), the brightness grew monotonically (Fig. 1c).We call this illusion the temporal context effect (TCE; see the online demonstration at http://nba.uth.tmc.edu/homepage/eagleman/TCE).It could be that the brief flash looks the same in all conditions but is reported as brighter because it is compared with a dimming long flash. To address this possibility we tested whether the long flash dims perceptually. Observers were asked whether they detected a
HHMI Author ManuscriptHHMI Author Manuscript HHMI Author Manuscript change in flashes that either physically ramped up or down in luminance or stayed constant. Observers reported that a physically unchanging flash was perceived as unchanging; that is, the observers (at least in these conditions) were adaptation-blind (Fig. 2a). This suggests that relative timing actually changes the brightness of the brief flash. To test this, we presented the stimulus shown in Fig. 2b: a brief flash is onset-matched with two long flashes; a second brief flash is offset-matched with the long flashes. Observers directly compared the two brief flashes against each other. The offset-matched brief flash appeared brighter than the onset-matched brief flash. This effect depends on the presence of the long flas...