Relationships among lightness illusions uncovered by analyses of individual differences.

IF 2.3 4区 心理学 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Yuki Kobayashi, Arthur G Shapiro
{"title":"Relationships among lightness illusions uncovered by analyses of individual differences.","authors":"Yuki Kobayashi, Arthur G Shapiro","doi":"10.1167/jov.25.12.14","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Computational models that explain lightness/brightness illusions have been proposed. These models have been assessed using a simplistic criterion: the number of illusions each model can correctly predict from the test set. This simple method of evaluation assumes that each illusion is independent; however, because the independence and similarity among lightness illusions have not been well established, potential interdependencies among the illusions in the test set could distort the evaluation of models. Moreover, evaluating models with a single value obscures where the model's strengths and weaknesses lie. We collected the magnitudes of various lightness illusions through two online experiments and applied exploratory factor analyses. Both experiments identified some underlying factors in these illusions, suggesting that they can be classified into a few distinct groups. Experiment 1 identified three common factors; assimilation, contrast, and White's effect. Experiment 2, with a different illusion set, identified two factors-assimilation and contrast. We then examined three well-known models that are based on early visual processes, using the outcomes of the experiments. The examination of these models revealed biases in the models toward specific factors or sets of illusions, which suggested their limitations. This study clarified that correlations of illusion magnitudes provide valuable insights into both illusions and models and highlighted the need to assess models based on their ability to account for underlying factors rather than individual illusions.</p>","PeriodicalId":49955,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Vision","volume":"25 12","pages":"14"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Vision","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.25.12.14","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Computational models that explain lightness/brightness illusions have been proposed. These models have been assessed using a simplistic criterion: the number of illusions each model can correctly predict from the test set. This simple method of evaluation assumes that each illusion is independent; however, because the independence and similarity among lightness illusions have not been well established, potential interdependencies among the illusions in the test set could distort the evaluation of models. Moreover, evaluating models with a single value obscures where the model's strengths and weaknesses lie. We collected the magnitudes of various lightness illusions through two online experiments and applied exploratory factor analyses. Both experiments identified some underlying factors in these illusions, suggesting that they can be classified into a few distinct groups. Experiment 1 identified three common factors; assimilation, contrast, and White's effect. Experiment 2, with a different illusion set, identified two factors-assimilation and contrast. We then examined three well-known models that are based on early visual processes, using the outcomes of the experiments. The examination of these models revealed biases in the models toward specific factors or sets of illusions, which suggested their limitations. This study clarified that correlations of illusion magnitudes provide valuable insights into both illusions and models and highlighted the need to assess models based on their ability to account for underlying factors rather than individual illusions.

个体差异分析揭示的轻错觉之间的关系。
已经提出了解释亮度/亮度错觉的计算模型。这些模型都是用一个简单的标准来评估的:每个模型能从测试集中正确预测的错觉的数量。这种简单的评估方法假设每个幻觉都是独立的;然而,由于亮度错觉之间的独立性和相似性尚未很好地建立,因此测试集中错觉之间潜在的相互依赖性可能会扭曲模型的评估。此外,用单一值评估模型会模糊模型的优点和缺点。我们通过两次在线实验收集了不同亮度错觉的大小,并进行了探索性因子分析。两个实验都发现了这些幻觉的一些潜在因素,表明它们可以被分为几个不同的群体。实验1确定了三个共同因素;同化、对比和怀特效应。实验2采用不同的错觉集,确定了两个因素——同化和对比。然后,我们利用实验结果,研究了三个基于早期视觉过程的著名模型。对这些模型的检查揭示了模型对特定因素或错觉集的偏见,这表明了它们的局限性。该研究澄清了错觉大小的相关性为错觉和模型提供了有价值的见解,并强调了基于其解释潜在因素的能力而不是单个错觉来评估模型的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Vision
Journal of Vision 医学-眼科学
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
5.60%
发文量
218
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Exploring all aspects of biological visual function, including spatial vision, perception, low vision, color vision and more, spanning the fields of neuroscience, psychology and psychophysics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信