Perceptual completions

Lier, Rob van; Gerbino, Walter

doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199686858.013.040

Cited by 43 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Research on amodal completion ( Kanizsa, 1985 ; Michotte, Thinès, & Crabbé, 1964 ; van Lier & Gerbino, 2015 ), however, indicates that our mental representations of the occluded parts of a visual scene often have surprisingly much in common with ordinary visual representations. First, as illustrated in Figure 1 , our experience of the hidden parts of an object often involves a curious and compelling sense of “perceptual presence” ( Leddington, 2009 ) or “amodal presence” ( Michotte et al., 1964 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Amodal Volume Completion and the Thin Building Illusion

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We report results from an experiment showing that a tall pillar with a triangular base evokes radically different three-dimensional (3D) percepts depending on the vantage point from which it is observed. The base of the pillar is an isosceles right triangle, but the pillar is perceived as just a thin plane when viewed from some vantage points. Viewed from other vantage points, the perceived 3D shape of the pillar corresponds to a square or rectangular base. In general, our results suggest that the visual system uses a preference for rectangularity (or symmetry) to determine the 3D shape of objects. The amodal impressions of the invisible backside of the pillar are often quite compelling, and the corresponding illusions persist even when the observers know the true shape of the pillar. Interestingly, though, the compellingness and definiteness of the amodal impression of the pillar’s backside depends on the vantage point. This is reflected in corresponding differences in the interobserver variability of the 3D shape judgments. We also discuss how variants of this illusion are used as a powerful tool in the art of magic.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Amodal Volume Completion and the Thin Building Illusion

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We consider the topic of “amodal completion” ( Briscoe, 2011 ; De Wit & van Lier, 2002 ; Nanay, 2010 ; Sekuler & Murray, 2001 ; van Lier & Gerbino, 2015 ) from the perspective of the visual arts and from the background of visual perception. The latter background is considered common knowledge to the readers of this journal.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This plays no role in this experiment. For further terminological discussion, see van Lier and Gerbino (2015) ; Scherzer and Ekroll (2015) ; and Kanizsa (1955) on “virtual lines.”…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vanishing Girls, Mysterious Blacks

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Participants had to indicate the location of points on what might be called “amodal contours” in some works of art. The works represented mutually quite different cases. In one case, there were not even scattered modal cues, thus the amodal contour had to be hallucinated on the basis of generic familiarity. Here, observers indicated coherent geometrical structures (to a good approximation a smooth curve), although at idiosyncratic locations. In another case, we presented an ambiguous image that led to much more “fuzzy” amodal completions. We also presented an image that had at least some similarity to a configuration treated by Kanizsa. Here, observers were coherent and they mutually agreed, so the scarce modal cues apparently largely dictated the awareness.

show abstract

“…Almost all work to date has focused on how perceptual organization depends on the geometrical properties of shapes, for example, when explaining how shapes are decomposed into parts212223 or how missing pieces of occluded or fragmented shapes are interpolated2425262728293031323334. Here, however, we are interested in how shapes are perceived and represented depending on higher-level inferences about the causal origin of objects and their features.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual perception of shape altered by inferred causal history

Spröte

Schmidt

Fleming

2016

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the main functions of vision is to represent object shape. Most theories of shape perception focus exclusively on geometrical computations (e.g., curvatures, symmetries, axis structure). Here, however, we find that shape representations are also profoundly influenced by an object’s causal origins: the processes in its past that formed it. Observers placed dots on objects to report their perceived symmetry axes. When objects appeared ‘complete’—created entirely by a single generative process—responses closely approximated the object’s geometrical axes. However, when objects appeared ‘bitten’—as if parts had been removed by a distinct causal process—the responses deviated significantly from the geometrical axes, as if the bitten regions were suppressed from the computation of symmetry. This suppression of bitten regions was also found when observers were not asked about symmetry axes but about the perceived front and back of objects. The findings suggest that visual shape representations are more sophisticated than previously appreciated. Objects are not only parsed according to what features they have, but also to how or why they have those features.

show abstract

Perceptual completions

Cited by 43 publications

References 0 publications

Amodal Volume Completion and the Thin Building Illusion

Amodal Volume Completion and the Thin Building Illusion

Vanishing Girls, Mysterious Blacks

Visual perception of shape altered by inferred causal history

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About