Determinants of the rod and frame effect: The role of retinal size

Sheldon M. Ebenholtz

doi:10.3758/bf03198759

Determinants of the rod-and-frame effect: Role of organization and subjective contour

Perception & Psychophysics ◽

10.3758/bf03204301 ◽

1980 ◽

Vol 27 (2) ◽

pp. 136-140 ◽

Cited By ~ 21

Author(s):

Michael J. Streibel ◽

Richard D. Barnes ◽

George D. Julness ◽

Sheldon M. Ebenholtz

Keyword(s):

Subjective Contour ◽

Frame Effect ◽

Rod And Frame

Strobe Frequency in the Rod and Frame Effect

Perceptual and Motor Skills ◽

10.2466/pms.1997.85.1.43 ◽

1997 ◽

Vol 85 (1) ◽

pp. 43-50 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Corinne Cian ◽

Dominique Esquivie ◽

Pierre-Alain Barraud ◽

Christian Raphel ◽

Théophile Ohlmann

Keyword(s):

Eye Movements ◽

Visual Field ◽

Body Posture ◽

Visual Scanning ◽

Posture Analysis ◽

Frame Effect ◽

Field Static ◽

Normal Light ◽

Rod And Frame

This experiment dealt with the role of strobe frequency on the rod and frame effect in frame-dependent and frame-independent subjects in light of the destabilizing effect of strobe lighting on body posture. Analysis showed that the frame effect was resistant to strobe illumination and was significantly stronger at 2 Hz titan at 9 Hz. Since the stroboscopic effect was not related to the extent of the frame effect observed in normal light, there was no over-all dependence on the different components of the visual field (static and kinetic). Moreover, analysis of eye movements during stroboscopic exposure confirmed previous observation of a visual scanning style related to orienting activity.

The Role of Cognitive Factors in the Rod-and-Frame Effect

Perception ◽

10.1068/p3270 ◽

2001 ◽

Vol 30 (12) ◽

pp. 1427-1438 ◽

Cited By ~ 10

Author(s):

Corinne Cian ◽

Christian Raphel ◽

Pierre Alain Barraud

Keyword(s):

Cognitive Factors ◽

Frame Effect ◽

Rod And Frame

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

Perceptual and Motor Skills ◽

10.2466/pms.1969.29.1.147 ◽

1969 ◽

Vol 29 (1) ◽

pp. 147-151 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

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.

The gap between rod and frame influences the rod-and-frame effect with small and large inducing displays

Perception & Psychophysics ◽

10.3758/bf03206933 ◽

1993 ◽

Vol 54 (1) ◽

pp. 14-19 ◽

Cited By ~ 31

Author(s):

Pierluigi Zoccolotti ◽

Gabriella Antonucci ◽

Donatella Spinelli

Keyword(s):

Frame Effect ◽

Rod And Frame

Induced Motion and the Visual Vertical: Effects of Frame Size

Perceptual and Motor Skills ◽

10.2466/pms.1994.79.3f.1443 ◽

1994 ◽

Vol 79 (3_suppl) ◽

pp. 1443-1450 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Janice N. Brooks ◽

Michael F. Sherrick

Keyword(s):

Spatial Orientation ◽

Present Experiment ◽

Visual Motion ◽

Frame Size ◽

Frame Effect ◽

Visual Vertical ◽

Induced Motion ◽

Perceived Motion ◽

Extensive Involvement ◽

Rod And Frame

Induced visual motion and the rod-and-frame effect have both been explained in terms of changes in the observer's spatial orientation. Accordingly, we examined the effects of large and small visual frames on the two phenomena in the present experiment, testing 8 male and 8 female undergraduates. During induced motion, subjects noted the perceived motion of a stationary central point of light and then moved this light back to its apparent original location. For the visual vertical, subjects aligned two points of light to indicate the perceived vertical in the presence of straight and tilted frames. As predicted, the larger frames generated more induced motion and greater displacement of the visual vertical. These results may have occurred because the larger frame had a greater effect on the subjects' spatial orientation, perhaps due to the more extensive involvement of the peripheral, or ambient, visual system.

On the Possible Causal Relation between Perceived Spatial Orientation and Induced Motion

Perceptual and Motor Skills ◽

10.2466/pms.1995.80.2.641 ◽

1995 ◽

Vol 80 (2) ◽

pp. 641-642 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Anthony H. Reinhardt-Rutland

Keyword(s):

Spatial Orientation ◽

Causal Relation ◽

Frame Effect ◽

Induced Motion ◽

Rod And Frame

In 1994 Brooks and Sherrick showed that both the rod-and-frame effect and frame-and-spot-induced motion increase as the inducing frame is made larger. This suggests that change in perceived spatial orientation causes induced motion. Here it is argued that the rod-and-frame effect is more appropriately compared with induced rotation, which differs from frame-and-spot-induced motion in a number of ways. It is argued that the rod-and-frame effect may inhibit induced rotation.

The Rod-and-Frame Effect: The Whole is Less than the Sum of its Parts

Perception ◽

10.1068/p5411 ◽

2005 ◽

Vol 34 (6) ◽

pp. 699-716 ◽

Cited By ~ 10

Author(s):

Wenxun Li ◽

Leonard Matin

Keyword(s):

Visual Perception ◽

Mass Action ◽

Induction Effect ◽

Frame Effect ◽

Object A ◽

Tilted Frame ◽

Additive Combination ◽

The Individual ◽

Rod And Frame ◽

Individual Line

Since the discovery of the influence of the tilted frame on the visual perception of the orientation perceived as vertical (VPV), the frame has been treated as a unitary object—a Gestalt. We evaluated the effect of 1-line, 2-line, 3-line, and 4-line (square frame) stimuli of two different sizes, and asked whether the influence of the square frame on VPV is any greater than the additive combination of separate influences produced by the individual lines constituting the frame. We found that, for each size, the square frame is considerably less influential than the additive combination of the influences of the individual lines. The results conform to a mass action rule, in which the lengths and orientations of the individual line components are what matters and the organization of the lines into a square does not—no higher-level Gestalt property is involved in the induction effect on VPV.

Large Errors in the Perception of Verticality are Generated by Luminance Borders (Integrated across Space) Not by Subjective Borders

Perception ◽

10.1068/p3070 ◽

2001 ◽

Vol 30 (2) ◽

pp. 177-184

Author(s):

Donatella Spinelli ◽

Gabriella Antonucci ◽

Maria Luisa Martelli ◽

Pierluigi Zoccolotti

Keyword(s):

Opposite Direction ◽

Subjective Contour ◽

Standard Condition ◽

Global Orientation ◽

Tilted Frame ◽

Frame Tilt ◽

Visual Vertical ◽

Perception Of Verticality ◽

Rod And Frame

The rod-and-frame illusion shows large errors in the judgment of visual vertical in the dark if the frame is large and there are no other visible cues (Witkin and Asch, 1948 Journal of Experimental Psychology38 762–782). Three experiments were performed to investigate other characteristics of the frame critical for generating these large errors. In the first experiment, the illusion produced by an 11° tilted frame made by luminance borders (standard condition) was considerably larger than that produced by a subjective-contour frame. In the second experiment, with a 33° frame tilt, the illusion was in the direction of frame tilt with a luminance-border frame but in the opposite direction in the subjective-contour condition. In the third experiment, to contrast the role of local and global orientation, the sides of the frame were made of short separate luminous segments. The segments could be oriented in the same direction as the frame sides, in the opposite direction, or could be vertical. The orientation of the global frame dominated the illusion while local orientation produced much smaller effects. Overall, to generate a large rod-and-frame illusion in the dark, the tilted frame must have luminance, not subjective, contours. Luminance borders do not need to be continuous: a frame made of sparse segments is also effective. The mechanism responsible for the large orientation illusion is driven by integrators of orientation across large areas, not by figural operators extracting shape orientation in the absence of oriented contours.

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

Perception ◽

10.1068/p240623 ◽

1995 ◽

Vol 24 (6) ◽

pp. 623-630 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

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.