均匀纹理在使纹理元素在视觉周边清晰可见方面的作用

Q1 Social Sciences
Open Mind Pub Date : 2024-04-03 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1162/opmi_a_00136
Marco Bertamini, Carolina Maria Oletto, Giulio Contemori
{"title":"均匀纹理在使纹理元素在视觉周边清晰可见方面的作用","authors":"Marco Bertamini, Carolina Maria Oletto, Giulio Contemori","doi":"10.1162/opmi_a_00136","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>There are important differences between central and peripheral vision. With respect to shape, contours retain phenomenal sharpness, although some contours disappear if they are near other contours. This leads to some uniform textures to appear non-uniform (Honeycomb illusion, Bertamini et al., 2016). Unlike other phenomena of shape perception in the periphery, this illusion is showing how continuity of the texture does not contribute to phenomenal continuity. We systematically varied the relationship between central and peripheral regions, and we collected subjective reports (how far can one see lines) as well as judgments of line orientation. We used extended textures created with a square grid and some additional lines that are invisible when they are located at the corners of the grid, or visible when they are separated from the grid (control condition). With respects to subjective reports, we compared the region of visibility for cases in which the texture was uniform (Exp 1a), or when in a central region the lines were different (Exp 1b). There were no differences, showing no role of objective uniformity on visibility. Next, in addition to the region of visibility we measured sensitivity using a forced-choice task (line tilted left or right) (Exp 2). The drop in sensitivity with eccentricity matched the size of the region in which lines were perceived in the illusion condition, but not in the control condition. When participants were offered a choice to report of the lines were present or absent (Exp 3) they confirmed that they did not see them in the illusion condition, but saw them in the control condition. We conclude that mechanisms that control perception of contours operate differently in the periphery, and override prior expectations, including that of uniformity. Conversely, when elements are detected in the periphery, we assign to them properties based on information from central vision, but these shapes cannot be identified correctly when the task requires such discrimination.</p>","PeriodicalId":32558,"journal":{"name":"Open Mind","volume":"8 ","pages":"462-482"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11045036/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Role of Uniform Textures in Making Texture Elements Visible in the Visual Periphery.\",\"authors\":\"Marco Bertamini, Carolina Maria Oletto, Giulio Contemori\",\"doi\":\"10.1162/opmi_a_00136\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>There are important differences between central and peripheral vision. With respect to shape, contours retain phenomenal sharpness, although some contours disappear if they are near other contours. This leads to some uniform textures to appear non-uniform (Honeycomb illusion, Bertamini et al., 2016). Unlike other phenomena of shape perception in the periphery, this illusion is showing how continuity of the texture does not contribute to phenomenal continuity. We systematically varied the relationship between central and peripheral regions, and we collected subjective reports (how far can one see lines) as well as judgments of line orientation. We used extended textures created with a square grid and some additional lines that are invisible when they are located at the corners of the grid, or visible when they are separated from the grid (control condition). With respects to subjective reports, we compared the region of visibility for cases in which the texture was uniform (Exp 1a), or when in a central region the lines were different (Exp 1b). There were no differences, showing no role of objective uniformity on visibility. Next, in addition to the region of visibility we measured sensitivity using a forced-choice task (line tilted left or right) (Exp 2). The drop in sensitivity with eccentricity matched the size of the region in which lines were perceived in the illusion condition, but not in the control condition. When participants were offered a choice to report of the lines were present or absent (Exp 3) they confirmed that they did not see them in the illusion condition, but saw them in the control condition. We conclude that mechanisms that control perception of contours operate differently in the periphery, and override prior expectations, including that of uniformity. Conversely, when elements are detected in the periphery, we assign to them properties based on information from central vision, but these shapes cannot be identified correctly when the task requires such discrimination.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":32558,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Open Mind\",\"volume\":\"8 \",\"pages\":\"462-482\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11045036/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Open Mind\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1162/opmi_a_00136\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Mind","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/opmi_a_00136","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

中心视力和周边视力之间存在重要差异。在形状方面,虽然有些轮廓在靠近其他轮廓时会消失,但它们仍能保持惊人的清晰度。这导致一些均匀的纹理看起来不均匀(蜂巢错觉,Bertamini 等人,2016 年)。与外围形状感知的其他现象不同,这种错觉显示了纹理的连续性并不会对现象的连续性产生影响。我们系统地改变了中心区域和外围区域之间的关系,并收集了主观报告(能看到多远的线条)以及对线条方向的判断。我们使用的扩展纹理由一个正方形网格和一些额外的线条组成,这些线条位于网格四角时不可见,而与网格分开时则可见(对照条件)。在主观报告方面,我们比较了纹理统一(实验 1a)或中心区域线条不同(实验 1b)时的可见区域。结果没有差异,说明客观均匀性对可见度没有影响。接下来,除了能见度区域外,我们还使用强迫选择任务(线条向左或向右倾斜)测量了灵敏度(实验 2)。在错觉条件下,灵敏度随偏心率的下降与线条可视区域的大小相匹配,而在对照条件下则不然。当让参与者选择报告线条是否存在时(实验 3),他们确认在幻觉条件下没有看到线条,但在对照条件下看到了线条。我们的结论是,控制轮廓感知的机制在外围以不同的方式运行,并推翻先前的预期,包括对均匀性的预期。相反,当元素在外围被检测到时,我们会根据来自中心视觉的信息赋予它们属性,但当任务要求进行这种辨别时,这些形状却无法被正确识别。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Role of Uniform Textures in Making Texture Elements Visible in the Visual Periphery.

There are important differences between central and peripheral vision. With respect to shape, contours retain phenomenal sharpness, although some contours disappear if they are near other contours. This leads to some uniform textures to appear non-uniform (Honeycomb illusion, Bertamini et al., 2016). Unlike other phenomena of shape perception in the periphery, this illusion is showing how continuity of the texture does not contribute to phenomenal continuity. We systematically varied the relationship between central and peripheral regions, and we collected subjective reports (how far can one see lines) as well as judgments of line orientation. We used extended textures created with a square grid and some additional lines that are invisible when they are located at the corners of the grid, or visible when they are separated from the grid (control condition). With respects to subjective reports, we compared the region of visibility for cases in which the texture was uniform (Exp 1a), or when in a central region the lines were different (Exp 1b). There were no differences, showing no role of objective uniformity on visibility. Next, in addition to the region of visibility we measured sensitivity using a forced-choice task (line tilted left or right) (Exp 2). The drop in sensitivity with eccentricity matched the size of the region in which lines were perceived in the illusion condition, but not in the control condition. When participants were offered a choice to report of the lines were present or absent (Exp 3) they confirmed that they did not see them in the illusion condition, but saw them in the control condition. We conclude that mechanisms that control perception of contours operate differently in the periphery, and override prior expectations, including that of uniformity. Conversely, when elements are detected in the periphery, we assign to them properties based on information from central vision, but these shapes cannot be identified correctly when the task requires such discrimination.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Open Mind
Open Mind Social Sciences-Linguistics and Language
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
审稿时长
53 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信