Some Factors Determining Figure‐ground Articulation

Harrower, Molly

doi:10.1111/j.2044-8295.1936.tb00806.x

Cited by 30 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such a blending or fusing process would seem to cause the remaining parts of the pattern to "stand out" more from the background, thereby increasing their figural dominance. Experimental evidence which would support the Liebmann effect had been obtained earlier by Harrower (1936), using a white-black ambiguous pattern. When the surrounding background was dark gray, the white cross dominated, and when' the surrounding background was light gray, the black cross dominated.…”

Section: Contrast With Backgroundsupporting

confidence: 57%

“…The results would differ depending on whether the pattern and the surrounding background were of unequal or of equal brightnesses (Harrower, 1936). If the pattern and the surrounding background were of unequal brightnesses, the appearance of the pattern as a whole would necessarily be influenced by the background due to simultaneous brightness contrast (Cornsweet, 1970;Haber & Hershenson, 1973;Rock, 1975).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The part of the pattern reported most often as figure, or that seems to dominate the viewing, is defined as showing dominance. Several studies have attempted to obtain quantitative data on the factors responsible for determining dominance (Brown, 1955;Cohen, 1959;Goldhamer, 1934;Graham, 1929;Harrower, 1936;Oyama, 1950;Price, 1967;Sadler & Mefferd, 1970;Thetford, 1963). Some of the factors influencing figural dominance explored in these studies include hue, brightness, contrast with the surrounding background, and duration of observation time.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effects of hue, brightness, contrast with background, and observation time on figural dominance in ambiguous patterns

Murray

Ragland

1976

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ambiguous patterns composed of two alternate crosses of different hues and brightness on two different brightness backgrounds were viewed for 120 sec by 10 female college students. Each subject observed 92 pattern presentations (23 patterns, each pattern presented in 2 orientations and on each of 2 backgrounds). Effects of hue and brightness contrast with background were clearly demonstrated: blue was the most dominant, red the least, and green and yellow located in between. Brightness contrast of patterns with background accentuated figural dominance of the darker figures. The number of alternations increased over the observation time for hues of equal brightness; however, the relation of this measure to total duration of seeing a figure in studies of figural dominance is unclear. Theories of neural satiation, fatigue, and interaction were used in interpreting the results .

show abstract

Section: Contrast With Backgroundsupporting

confidence: 57%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of hue, brightness, contrast with background, and observation time on figural dominance in ambiguous patterns

Murray

Ragland

1976

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One can not fail to be struck by the similarities between the perception of mental concept images and the visual images as seen by the eye. In both processes the problem solver appears to be "looking" or searching for recognisable structures as in the traditional figure-ground problem (see for example Harrower, 1936, andTeuber, 1974). Newell and Simon conclude that: "... problem solving takes place by search in a problem space.…”

Section: Creative Problem Solvingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Educational objectives in engineering design courses

Samuel

1984

Instr Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article addresses the general educational concepts of engineering design together with the contrast of current instruction techniques in tertiary institutions. Work at Melbourne is reviewed in this context with particular reference to matching educational objectives to current educational theory. A case study in engineering design is evaluated against this frame of reference and some educational hypotheses are proposed. It is concluded that testing of the proposed hypotheses will require considerable research effort by design educators.

show abstract

“…We considered a region to be symmetric if a vertical line drawn through its center divided it into two regions that were mirror images of each other. Since the time of the gestalt psychologists, symmetry has been counted among the variables that contribute to perceived figure-ground organization (e.g., Harrower, 1936). Symmetric regions are more likely to be seen as figure than are asymmetric regions.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Must Figure-Ground Organization Precede Object Recognition? An Assumption in Peril

Peterson

Gibson²

1994

Psychol Sci

213

199

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The assumption that figure-ground segmentation ml/st precede object or shape recognition has been celltral to theories ofvisual perception. We showed that assumption to be incorrect in an experiment in whiciz observers reported the first perceivedfigure-ground organization ofbriefly exposed stimuli depicting two regions sharing a figure-ground border. We manipulated the symmetry ofthe two regions and their orientationdependellt denotivity (roughly, their meaningfulness), and measured how each of these variables influenced figure-ground reports when the stimuli were exposedfor 14, 28, 57, 86, or 100 ms, andfollowed immediately by a mask. Influences onfigureground organization from both sym"metry and orientationdependent object recognition processes were found; both were observed first in the 28-ms condition. Object recognition inputs did not dominate symmetry inputs. We suggest that object recognition processes may operate simultaneously on both sides of edges detected before figure-ground relationships are determined.Figure-ground organization entails segmenting the visual field into regions that are figures and regions that are backgrounds. Figures are patently endowed with shape and appear to occlude backgrounds; the latter appear to be shapeless near the borders they share with figures. Since the early 20th century, most theories of visual perception and object recognition have been grounded on the assumption that regions must be registered as figures before they can be matched to representations of objects in memory (Biederman

show abstract

Some Factors Determining Figure‐ground Articulation

Cited by 30 publications

References 0 publications

Effects of hue, brightness, contrast with background, and observation time on figural dominance in ambiguous patterns

Effects of hue, brightness, contrast with background, and observation time on figural dominance in ambiguous patterns

Educational objectives in engineering design courses

Must Figure-Ground Organization Precede Object Recognition? An Assumption in Peril

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About