Vertical-horizontal illusion: One eye is better than two

Prinzmetal, William; Gettleman, Laurie

doi:10.3758/bf03211717

Cited by 62 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 29 publications

(33 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It has long been known that the HVI is sensitive to the "frame" ofthe visual field around the target (Kiinnapas, 1955(Kiinnapas, , 1957(Kiinnapas, , 1959. Indeed, a strong case can be made that the tendency for verticals to appear longer than horizontals across a wide range ofconditions reflects the intrinsic shape of the visual field, which is wider than it is high (e.g., Prinzmetal & Gettleman, 1993). The typical explanation is that length is perceived relative to this frame.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because the visual field is wider than it is high, people may tend to experience greater horizontal than vertical extents. With binocular viewing, the visual field is ovoid, its horizontal axis being nearly half again greater than its vertical axis, about 200 0 versus 130 0 (see Prinzmetal & Gettleman, 1993). If, as a result of this asymmetry, people are exposed on average to greater horizontal than vertical extents, the long-term discrepancy in the distribution of horizontal and vertical percepts might induce a differential effect on the perception ofverticals and horizontals, enhancing the former relative to the latter and thereby producing the HVI.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although Potts's (1991) results showed clear differential effects of stimulus context, the size of the HVI obtained in many of her test conditions was surprisingly large-as great as 52% in terms of magnitude estimates. More typically, the size of the HVI lies between 5% and 10%, measured as the percentage difference between matching vertical and horizontal extents (see, e.g., Prinzmetal & Gettleman, 1993). The exact value depends, however, on factors such as the "frame" encompassing the target (Kiinnapas, 1955(Kiinnapas, , 1957 and the inferred depth of the display (Collani, 1985;Girgus & Coren, 1975), as well as the configural properties of the stimulus.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Differential effects of stimulus context on perceived length: Implications for the horizontal-vertical illusion

Armstrong

Marks

1997

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Six experiments examined orientation-specific effects of stimulus context on the visual perception of horizontal and vertical lengths: Using a paired-comparison method, Experiments 1-5 showed that the probability of judging a given vertical line to be longer than a given horizontal line was relatively great when the stimulus set comprised relatively long horizontals and short verticals, and relatively small when the stimulus set comprised short horizontals with long verticals. To the extent that stimulus context exerts orientation-specific effects on perceived length, it thereby modulates the degree to which verticals appear longer than physically equivalent horizontals: the horizontal-vertical illusion (HVI). Under various contextual conditions, the HVI was as small as 3% (horizontals had to be 3%greater than verticals to be perceived as equally long) and as great as 15%, equaling about 12%in a "neutral" context. In Experiment 6, subjects judged the absolute physical length of each stimulus, and the results indicated that stimulus context acted largely by decreasing perceived lengths. The results are consistent with the hypothesis that differential effects of context reflect a process of stimulus-specific perceptual attenuation.Stimulus context is well known to affect psychophysical judgments, which can be highly sensitive to such factors as the range of the stimuli, how often they are presented, and the sequence of presentation (for review, see Poulton, 1989). Especially striking are various stimulus-specific or differential effects of context-that is, situations in which context exerts unequal effects on different subsets of stimuli.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Differential effects of stimulus context on perceived length: Implications for the horizontal-vertical illusion

Armstrong

Marks

1997

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, both the Zöllner and the Ponzo illusions are greater in the vertical than in the horizontal orientation (Fisher, 1968b(Fisher, , 1973Oyama, 1975). We do not know the cause of this difference, but it may be related to other anisotrophies in the visual field (Prinzmetal & Gettleman, 1993). Of course, these similarities may simply be a coincidence, and the misperception of length in the Ponzo illusion might be unrelated to orientation perception.…”

mentioning

confidence: 91%

The Ponzo illusion and the perception of orientation

Prinzmetal

Shimamura

Mikolinski

2001

Perception & Psychophysics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A new theory, called the tilt constancy theory, claims that the Ponzo illusion is caused by the misperception of orientation induced by local visual cues. The theory relates the Ponzo illusion-along with the Zöllner, Poggendorff, Wündt-Hering, and cafe wall illusions-to the mechanisms that enable us to perceive stable orientations despite changes in retinal orientation or body orientation. In Experiment 1, the magnitude of the misperception of orientation was compared with the magnitude of the Ponzo illusion. In Experiment 2, predictions of the tilt constancy theory were compared with accounts based on (1) low spatial frequencies in the image, (2) memory comparisons (pool-and-store model), and (3) relative size judgments. In Experiment 3, predictions of the tilt constancy theory were tested against predictions of the assimilation theory of Pressey and his colleagues. In the final experiment, the orientation account was compared with theories based on linear perspective and inappropriate size constancy. The results support the tilt constancy theory.

show abstract

“…We expected that the vertical lines would be judged longer than physically equal horizontal lines (HVI). We also expected that the size of the HVI would lie between 9% and 15%, a range reported in earlier studies (Armstrong & Marks, 1997;Prinzmetal & Gettleman, 1993). Finally, we had no compelling reason to expect that the size of the HVI would differ in the two eyes.…”

Section: Experiments 1a Baseline Measuresmentioning

confidence: 77%