Dataset Information

Illumination frame of reference in the object-reviewing paradigm: A case of luminance and lightness.

ABSTRACT: The present study combines the object-reviewing paradigm (Kahneman, Treisman, & Gibbs, 1992) with the checkershadow illusion (Adelson, 1995) to contrast the effects of objects' luminance versus lightness on the object-specific preview benefit. To this end, we manipulated objects' luminance and the amount of illumination given by an informative background scene in experiments. In line with previous studies (Moore, Stephens, & Hein, 2010), there was no object-specific preview benefit when objects were presented on a uniformly colored background and luminance switched between objects. In contrast, when objects were presented on the checkershadow illusion background which provided an explanation for the luminance switch, a reliable object-specific preview benefit was observed. This suggests that object correspondence as measured by the object-reviewing paradigm can be influenced by scene-induced, perceived lightness of objects' surfaces. We replicated this finding and moreover showed that the scene context only influences the object-specific preview benefit if the objects are perceived as part of the background scene.

SUBMITTER: Fiedler A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4666744 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Illumination frame of reference in the object-reviewing paradigm: A case of luminance and lightness.

Fiedler Anja A Moore Cathleen M CM

Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance 20150817 6

The present study combines the object-reviewing paradigm (Kahneman, Treisman, & Gibbs, 1992) with the checkershadow illusion (Adelson, 1995) to contrast the effects of objects' luminance versus lightness on the object-specific preview benefit. To this end, we manipulated objects' luminance and the amount of illumination given by an informative background scene in experiments. In line with previous studies (Moore, Stephens, & Hein, 2010), there was no object-specific preview benefit when objects ...[more]

PMID: 26280265

Similar Datasets

Project description:Brightness (perceived intensity) and lightness (perceived reflectance) matching were investigated in seven well-known visual stimuli that contain a visible shadow or transparent overlay. These stimuli are frequently upheld as evidence that low-level spatial filtering is inadequate to explain brightness/lightness illusions and that additional mid- or high-level mechanisms are required. The argument in favor of rejecting low-level spatial filtering explanations has been founded on the erroneous assumption that equating test patch and near surround luminance is sufficient to control for and rule out this type of mechanism. We tested this idea by comparing the matching behavior of four observers to the predictions of the ODOG multiscale filtering model (Blakeslee & McCourt, 1999). Lightness and brightness matching differed significantly only when test patches appeared in shadow or beneath a transparency. Lightness and brightness matches were both significantly larger under these conditions; however, the lightness matches greatly exceeded the brightness matches. Lightness matches were greater for test patches in shadow or beneath a transparency because lightness matches under these conditions were based on conscious inferential (not sensory-level) judgments where observers attempted to discount the difference in illumination. The ODOG model accounted for approximately 80% of the total variance in the brightness matches (as well as in the lightness matches for targets not in shadow or beneath a transparency), and successfully predicted the relative magnitude of these matches in five of the seven stimulus sets. These results indicate that multiscale spatial filtering provides a unified and parsimonious explanation for brightness perception in these stimuli and imply that higher-level mechanisms are not required to explain them. The model was not as successful for the argyle and wall of blocks illusions in that it incorrectly rank-ordered the relative magnitude of the effects across different versions of the stimuli. It is an important question whether such model failures are due to known but corrigible limitations of the ODOG model or whether they will require other (possibly higher-level) explanations.

Dataset Information

Illumination frame of reference in the object-reviewing paradigm: A case of luminance and lightness.

Publications

Illumination frame of reference in the object-reviewing paradigm: A case of luminance and lightness.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets