Room tilt illusion in epilepsy

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 901-905
Author(s):  
Deema Fattal ◽  
Anne-Sophie Wattiez ◽  
Erik St Louis ◽  
Karina Gonzalez-Otarula ◽  
Rup Sainju
Keyword(s):  
2006 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 51-56
Author(s):  
Ellen L. Schroeder ◽  
Amber Levendusky
Keyword(s):  

1975 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Wenderoth ◽  
Brain O'toole ◽  
Ian Curthoys
Keyword(s):  

2012 ◽  
Vol 60 (4) ◽  
pp. 423 ◽  
Author(s):  
Míriam Eimil-Ortiz ◽  
InésPecharromándeLas Heras ◽  
CarlosLópez de Silanes de Miguel ◽  
Marta González-Salaices ◽  
MiguelA Sáiz-Sepúlveda

Perception ◽  
1993 ◽  
Vol 22 (6) ◽  
pp. 705-712
Author(s):  
Giovanni B Vicario ◽  
Giulio Vidotto ◽  
Elena Zambianchi

An optical—geometrical illusion, described by Delbœuf and not familiar to specialists, is investigated. The results of two experiments show that the divergence between a bar filled with parallel slanting lines and a line drawn above it is clearly related to this angle of the lines which fill the bar. The illusion is already present when this angle is 10°, reaches its maximum at 20°, decreases at 30°, and almost disappears at 40°. These results are similar to those found for the tilt illusion, are slightly different from those found for the rod-and-frame illusion, and differ greatly from those found for the Zöllner illusion. The other variables considered—the distance between the slanting lines filling up the bar, the distance between the upper line and the bar, and the width of the bar—do not influence the illusion as much. Since either the line appears as diverging from the bar, or the bar seems inclined in relation to the line, the illusion should be considered a complex one. The small oblique lines inside the bar induce obliquity in the opposite sense in the display, but which of the elements is seen as diverging from the other depends on which of the two is established as the frame of reference.


2010 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 126-126
Author(s):  
I. Mareschal ◽  
J. Solomon ◽  
M. Morgan

2000 ◽  
Vol 32-33 ◽  
pp. 979-986 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ko Sakai ◽  
Shigeru Tanaka

Neurology ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 651-656 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. M. Bronstein ◽  
L. Yardley ◽  
A. P. Moore ◽  
L. Cleeves

i-Perception ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 204166952093840
Author(s):  
Li Zhaoping

Consider a gray field comprising pairs of vertically aligned dots; in each pair, one dot is white the other black. When viewed in a peripheral visual field, these pairs appear horizontally aligned. By the Central-Peripheral Dichotomy, this flip tilt illusion arises because top-down feedback from higher to lower visual cortical areas is too weak or absent in the periphery to veto confounded feedforward signals from the primary visual cortex (V1). The white and black dots in each pair activate, respectively, on and off subfields of V1 neural receptive fields. However, the sub-fields’ orientations, and the preferred orientations, of the most activated neurons are orthogonal to the dot alignment. Hence, V1 reports the flip tilt to higher visual areas. Top-down feedback vetoes such misleading reports, but only in the central visual field.


2019 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 469-471
Author(s):  
Umberto Pensato ◽  
Roberto D’Angelo ◽  
Rita Rinaldi ◽  
Maria Guarino ◽  
Pietro Cortelli

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document