THE EFFECT OF LIGHTNESS CONTRAST, TACHISTOSCOPIC DURATION AND FUNDUS PIGMENTATION ON THE MAGNITUDE OF THE MUELLER-LYER ILLUSION

1973 ◽  
Vol 50 (11) ◽  
pp. 872-879 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pamela C. Ebert ◽  
Robert H. Pollack
1973 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 433-434 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pamela C. Ebert ◽  
Robert H. Pollack

Lightness contrast, tachistoscopic duration, and fundus pigmentation have been found to be critical factors determining the magnitude of the Mueller-Lyer illusion. Figures produced by marked lightness contrast evidence a gradual rise in illusion size with prolonged viewing, while the reverse is true for a figure produced by minimal contrast.


1991 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. 225-229 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert H. Pollack ◽  
Theodore B. Jaeger

1976 ◽  
Vol 42 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1276-1278 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pam Ebert

Components of the Mueller-Lyer figure, representing two levels of lightness contrast (1.5 black/ and 7.5 light grey/ each on 9.5 white/ ground) were viewed tachistoscopically for 500 msec. by 65 white elementary school children and 50 white college students. The contrast effect was significant, with black figures yielding a greater illusion than the light grey figures at all age levels. Further, a bimodal distribution of fundus density was evident in both age categories, with more densely pigmented Ss yielding smaller illusions.


1972 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 225-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pamela C. Ebert ◽  
Robert H. Pollack

2021 ◽  
pp. 095679762199155
Author(s):  
Amanda R. Brown ◽  
Wim Pouw ◽  
Diane Brentari ◽  
Susan Goldin-Meadow

When we use our hands to estimate the length of a stick in the Müller-Lyer illusion, we are highly susceptible to the illusion. But when we prepare to act on sticks under the same conditions, we are significantly less susceptible. Here, we asked whether people are susceptible to illusion when they use their hands not to act on objects but to describe them in spontaneous co-speech gestures or conventional sign languages of the deaf. Thirty-two English speakers and 13 American Sign Language signers used their hands to act on, estimate the length of, and describe sticks eliciting the Müller-Lyer illusion. For both gesture and sign, the magnitude of illusion in the description task was smaller than the magnitude of illusion in the estimation task and not different from the magnitude of illusion in the action task. The mechanisms responsible for producing gesture in speech and sign thus appear to operate not on percepts involved in estimation but on percepts derived from the way we act on objects.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document