The Distinction between the Rod-and-Frame Illusion and the Rod-and-Frame Test

Perception ◽  
1974 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 205-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
P M Wenderoth
Keyword(s):  
Angular Function ◽  
Frame Effect ◽  
Tilt Illusion ◽  
Single Frame ◽  
Frame Tilt ◽  
Attraction Effects ◽  
Gravitational Vertical ◽  
Rod And Frame Test ◽  
Rod And Frame

Errors in vertical settings of a test rod occur when the rod is enclosed in a laterally-tilted square-outline frame. The majority of previous experiments which have investigated this rod-and-frame effect have used a single frame tilt, usually 28°, and have tabulated errors as average unsigned deviations from gravitational vertical. Evidence is presented that, when the illusion is measured by taking algebraic differences between constant (signed) errors made with and without the frame being present, illusions occur in the direction of frame tilt for frame tilts up to about 25° from vertical (repulsion effects) but that directionally opposite illusions (attraction effects) occur for frame tilts between 25° and 45°. At the frame tilts used most frequently in previous studies (25° to 30°) little or no illusion occurs. A distinction is drawn between the rod-and-frame illusion (RFI), which has an angular function similar to the simple tilt illusion and aftereffect, and the rod-and-frame test (RFT), which uses unsigned deviations from vertical as its measure of error and which probably bears little or no relationship to the RFI.

Comparison of Five Methods of Presenting the Rod-and-Frame Test

1969 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 147-151 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gene Lester
Keyword(s):  
Frame Effect ◽  
Undergraduate Women ◽  
Rod And Frame Test ◽  
Rod And Frame

Fifty undergraduate women were tested with 5 versions of the Rod-and-frame Test. One method yielded a significantly smaller variance than any other. The same method also gave a smaller frame effect than has previously been noted for female Ss.

Instructions, Illusory Self-Tilt and the Rod-and-Frame Test

1979 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 155-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Sigman ◽  
Donald R. Goodenough ◽  
Michael Flannagan
Keyword(s):  
Opposite Direction ◽  
Test Performance ◽  
The Body ◽  
Body Midline ◽  
Adjustment Error ◽  
Gravitational Vertical ◽  
Rod And Frame Test ◽  
Rod And Frame

If an illusion of self-tilt is involved in rod-and-frame test performance, then instructions to adjust the rod to the body midline (egocentric instructions) should result in less rod adjustment error than the standard instructions for the rod-and-frame test to adjust the rod to the gravitational vertical. Two experiments were designed to examine this possibility. The results of the first experiment indicate that the tilted rod-and-frame display induces an illusion of self-tilt in the opposite direction. Significant differences between instructional conditions were found in the second experiment as expected. Other rod-and-frame studies are discussed in view of these findings.

Respective Contribution of Orientation Contrast and Illusion of Self-Tilt to the Rod-And-Frame Effect

Perception ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 623-630 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corinne Cian ◽  
Dominique Esquivié ◽  
Pierre Alain Barraud ◽  
Christian Raphel
Keyword(s):  
Contrast Effect ◽  
Visual Angle ◽  
Angular Size ◽  
The Other ◽  
Frame Effect ◽  
Tilt Illusion ◽  
Orientation Contrast ◽  
Respective Contribution ◽  
Adjustment Test ◽  
Rod And Frame

The visual angle subtended by the frame seems to be an important determinant of the contribution of orientation contrast and illusion of self-tilt (ie vection) to the rod-and-frame effect. Indeed, the visuovestibular factor (which produces vection) seems to be predominant in large displays and the contrast effect in small displays. To determine how these two phenomena are combined to account for the rod-and-frame effect, independent estimates of the magnitude of each component in relation to the angular size subtended by the display were examined. Thirty-five observers were exposed to three sets of experimental situations: body-adjustment test (illusion of self-tilt only), the tilt illusion (contrast only) and the rod-and-frame test, each display subtending 7, 12, 28, and 45 deg of visual angle. Results showed that errors recorded in the three situations increased linearly with the angular size. Whatever the size of the frame, both mechanisms, contrast effect (tilt illusion) and illusory effect on self-orientation (body-adjustment test), are always present. However, rod-and-frame errors became greater at a faster rate than the other two effects as the size of the stimuli became larger. Neither one nor the other independent phenomen, nor the combined effect could fully account for the rod-and-frame effect whatever the angular size of the apparatus.

Component Analysis of Orientation Illusions

Perception ◽  
1977 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Wenderoth ◽  
Helen Beh
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Frequency ◽  
Indirect Effects ◽  
Component Analysis ◽  
Angular Function ◽  
Local Component ◽  
Tilt Illusion ◽  
Global Orientation ◽  
Positive Direct ◽  
Rod And Frame

Orientation illusions occur when the inducing figure is a line or grating (the tilt illusion) or a square outline frame (the rod-and-frame illusion). In the range of inducing figure tilts between vertical and horizontal, the tilt illusion describes one cycle of positive (direct) and negative (indirect) effects but the rod-and-frame illusion describes two such cycles. In two experiments, angular functions of illusions were measured with the six possible inducing figures which result when two of the four sides of a square inducing frame are deleted. As expected, the parallel-sided frame amputations induced angular functions similar to the tilt illusion and these functions differed from those induced by the orthogonal-sided amputations. In agreement with previous findings on the nonadditivity of tilt illusions, the sum of angular functions induced by frame amputations, which together form a complete frame, were not always equivalent to the angular function induced by a complete frame, and there were asymmetries in the data for which neither of two simple hypotheses could adequately account. The discussion focuses upon properties of inducing figures which psychophysical hypotheses might need to consider in order to account for the shapes of angular functions of orientation illusions and, in particular, a distinction is drawn between the global orientation of the inducing figure and the orientations of its (local) component features. It is suggested that it might be fruitful if the tilt illusion and the rod-and-frame illusion were conceived of as illusions resulting from inducing figures composed of all or part of n gratings of spatial frequency fn intersecting at angles of 180°/ n.

Measurement of Rod-and-Frame Test Performance

1982 ◽  
Vol 54 (3) ◽  
pp. 915-922 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary J. Allen ◽  
Marta Garcia ◽  
Linda Banerdt Bealessio
Keyword(s):  
Test Performance ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Scoring Systems ◽  
Female Adult ◽  
Frame Effect ◽  
Embedded Figures Test ◽  
Embedded Figures ◽  
Adult Volunteers ◽  
Rod And Frame Test ◽  
Rod And Frame

Data from 50 male and 50 female adult volunteers were analyzed for reliability and validity of three alternative scoring systems for the Rod and Frame Test, an absolute scoring system and two alternative algebraic scoring systems. Subjects took the Rod and Frame Test, Portable Rod and Frame Test, and the Embedded Figures Test. Absolute and algebraic frame-effect scores were reliable and valid. Rod-effect algebraic scores were less reliable and valid. Correlations were higher for females and correlations with the Embedded Figures Test were so low that the interchangeability of these field articulation measures is questionable.

Two-Dimensional Tilt Illusions Induced by Orthogonal Plaid Patterns: Effects of Plaid Motion, Orientation, Spatial Separation, and Spatial Frequency

Perception ◽  
1989 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Wenderoth ◽  
Syren Johnstone ◽  
Rick Van der Zwan
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Frequency ◽  
Real Line ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Spatial Separation ◽  
Frequency Condition ◽  
Angular Function ◽  
Frame Effect ◽  
Tilt Illusion ◽  
Plaid Motion ◽  
Axes Of Symmetry

Tilt illusions occur when a drifting vertical test grating is surrounded by a drifting plaid pattern composed of orthogonal moving gratings. The angular function of this illusion was measured as the plaid orientation (and therefore its drift direction) varied over a 180° range, This was done when the test and inducing stimuli abutted and had the same spatial frequency, and when the test and inducing stimuli either differed in frequency by an octave, or were spatially separated by a 2 deg blank annulus, or both differed in frequency and were also separated by the annulus (experiments 1–4). The obtained angular function was virtually identical to that obtained previously with the rod and frame effect and other cases involving orthogonal inducing components, with evidence for illusions induced both by real-line components and by virtual axes of symmetry. Although the magnitude of the illusion was very similar in all four experiments, there was evidence to suggest that largest real-line effects occurred in the abutting same-frequency condition, with a pattern of results similar to that obtained previously with the simple one-dimensional tilt illusion. On the other hand, virtual-axis effects were more prominent with gaps between test and inducing stimuli. A fifth, repeated-measures, experiment confirmed this pattern of results. It is suggested that this pattern-induced tilt effect reflects both striate and extrastriate mechanisms and that the apparent influence of spatially distal virtual axes of symmetry upon perceived orientation implies the existence of AND-gate mechanisms, or conjunction detectors, in the orientation domain.

Young Children's Rod-and-Frame Test Performance

1977 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 163-169 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathleen Haywood ◽  
Janet Teeple ◽  
Michael Givens ◽  
Judy Patterson
Keyword(s):  
Test Performance ◽  
Training Session ◽  
Standard Test ◽  
Developmental Trend ◽  
Contextual Cues ◽  
Frame Tilt ◽  
Order Of Presentation ◽  
Direction Opposite ◽  
Rod And Frame Test ◽  
Rod And Frame

Research on children's performance on the Witkin Rod-and-frame Test has suggested that children rely heavily on contextual cues in perceiving verticality but that this reliance decreases with age. In the present study this developmental trend in children younger than those previously tested was studied. The effect on performance of the conventional practice of tilting subjects in a chair which rotates about a seat axis, thus displacing the head away from the stimulus, was also studied. After a short training session 14 boys and 11 girls, 4.70 to 10.95 yr. old, were given 12 trials of the standard test while tilted about a seat axis and, on another day, 12 trials while tilted about a head axis. Although the axis of tilt and the order of presentation were nonsignificant, data tended to confirm the existence of a developmental trend in young children. An alternate scoring procedure to investigate errors in the direction opposite frame-tilt indicated that the initial tilt of the rod relative to the frame significantly affects the accuracy of judgments of the vertical.

An Entry in the Great Frame-Tilt Judging Contest

1981 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. R. Goodenough
Keyword(s):  
Present Article ◽  
Field Dependence ◽  
Frame Tilt ◽  
Dependence Theory ◽  
Rod And Frame Test ◽  
Rod And Frame

Some important questions about discrepancies between observer-perceived and investigator-defined direction of frame tilt are raised by Fine in his recent note on procedures used in the rod-and-frame test of field dependence. The practical and conceptual implications of these discrepancies are discussed in the present article in the context of Witkin's field-dependence theory and of recent findings on the nature of the rod-and-frame illusion.

Subjective Estimates of Body Tilt and the Rod-and-Frame Test

1978 ◽  
Vol 47 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1051-1056 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Sigman ◽  
Donald R. Goodenough ◽  
Michael Flannagan
Keyword(s):  
Magnitude Estimation ◽  
Opposite Direction ◽  
Body Position ◽  
Estimation Procedure ◽  
Body Tilt ◽  
Frame Tilt ◽  
Subjective Estimates ◽  
Rod And Frame Test ◽  
Rod And Frame

The existence of an illusion of self-tilt in the rod-and-frame test was demonstrated using a magnitude-estimation procedure. Subjects, seated in a tiltable chair, estimated their body tilt after being placed in one of 13 body tilt positions and while viewing a rod-and-frame display. A shift of the apparent body position occurred in the opposite direction of frame tilt. The results are consistent with earlier findings using the method of body and head adjustment.

Perception of the Upright in Normal and Schizophrenic Subjects

1980 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 104-106
Author(s):  
Prem Shanker
Keyword(s):  
Large Angle ◽  
Small Error ◽  
Mixed Design ◽  
Frame Tilt ◽  
Clockwise Direction ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Rod And Frame Test ◽  
Rod And Frame

To see the effects of a large angle of frame-tilt, movement of the rod in the clockwise direction, and the difference between the normal and schizophrenic subjects in the perception of the upright, a mixed design (subjects × angle × presentation × trial) was used. 24 normal and 24 schizophrenic subjects were tested in a darkroom with a rod-and-frame test. The results showed a small error with a clockwise movement of the rod, when the frame also was tilted clockwise, and no difference in perception of the upright between the normal and schizophrenic subjects.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document