To reverse or not to reverse: When is an ambiguous figure not ambiguous?

American Journal of Psychology

Volumn 112, Issue 1, 1999, Pages 41-71

  Long, Gerald M ^a   Olszweski, Anthony D ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEPTH PERCEPTION; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PSYCHOPHYSICS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; VISUAL ILLUSION;

ADULT; ATTENTION; DEPTH PERCEPTION; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; OPTICAL ILLUSIONS; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PSYCHOPHYSICS;

EID: 0033084823     PISSN: 00029556     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/1423624     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Babich, B., & Standing, L. (1981). Satiation effects with reversible figures. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 52, 203-210.
2. Barlow, H. B. (1990). A theory about the functional role and synaptic mechanism of visual aftereffects. In C. Blakemore (Ed.), Vision: Coding and efficiency (pp. 363-375). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
3. Beer, J. (1989). Learning effects while passively viewing the Necker cube. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 69, 1391-1394.
4. Boring, E. G. (1942). Sensation and perception in the history of experimental psychology (pp. 268-271). New York: Appleton-Century.
5. Brown, K. T. (1955). Rate of apparent change in a dynamic ambiguous figure as a function of observation-time. American Journal of Psychology, 68, 358-371.
6. Bugelski, B. R., & Alampay, D. A. (1961). The role of frequency in developing perceptual sets. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 15, 205-211.
7. Carlson, V. R. (1953). Satiation in a reversible perspective figure. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 45, 442-448.
8. Chaudhuri, A. (1990). Modulation of the motion after-effect by selective attention. Nature, 344, 60-62.
9. Ellis, S. R., & Stark, L. (1978). Eye movements during the viewing of the Necker cube. Perception, 7, 575-581.
10. Fisher, G. H. (1967). Preparation of ambiguous stimulus materials. Perception & Psychophysics, 2, 421-422.
11. Garcia-Perez, M. A. (1989). Visual inhomogeneity and eye movements in multistable perception. Perception & Psychophysics, 46, 397-400.
12. Girgus, J., Rock, I., & Egatz, R. (1977). The effect of knowledge of reversibility on the reversibility of ambiguous figures. Perception and Psychophysics, 22, 550-556.
13. Goolkasian, P. (1991). The effect of size on the perception of ambiguous figures. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 29, 161-164.
14. Harris, J. P. (1980). How does adaptation to disparity affect the perception of reversible figures? American Journal of Psychology, 93, 445-457.
15. Hochberg, J. (1950). Figure-ground reversal as a function of visual satiation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 40, 682-686.
16. Hochberg, J., & Peterson, M. A. (1987). Piecemeal organization and cognitive components in object perception: Perceptually coupled responses to moving objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 116, 370-380.
17. Horlitz, K. L., & O'Leary, A. (1993). Satiation or availability? Effects of attention, memory, and imagery on the perception of ambiguous figures. Perception & Psychophysics, 53, 668-681.
18. Howard, I. P. (1961). An investigation of a satiation process in the reversible perspective of revolving skeletal shapes. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 13, 19-33.
19. Kawabata, N., Yamagami, K., & Noaki. M. (1978). Visual fixation points and depth perception. Vision Research, 18, 853-854.
20. Kohler, W., & Wallach, H. (1944). Figural aftereffects, an investigation of visual processes. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 88, 269-357.
21. Leeper, R. (1935). A study of a neglected portion of the field of learning: The development of sensory organization. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 46, 41-75.
22. Liebert, R. M., & Burk, B. (1985). Voluntary control of reversible figures. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 61, 1307-1310.
23. Long, G. M., & Toppino, T. C. (1981). Multiple representations of the same figure: Implications for cognitive decisional interpretations. Perception, 10, 231-234.
24. Long, G. M., & Toppino, T. C. (1994a). Adaptation effects and reversible figures: A comment on Horlitz and O'Leary. Perception & Psychophysics, 56, 605-610.
25. Long, G. M., & Toppino, T. C. (1994b). A new twist on the rotating trapezoid: Evidence for neural adaptation effects. Perception, 23, 619-634.
26. Long, G. M., Toppino, T. C., & Kostenbauder, J. (1983). As the cube turns: Evidence for two processes in the perception of a dynamic reversible figure. Perception & Psychophysics, 34, 29-38.
27. Long, G. M., Toppino, T. C., & Mondin, G. (1992). Prime time: Fatigue and set effects in the perception of reversible figures. Perception & Psychophysics, 52, 609-616.
28. Magnussen, S., & Johnsen, T. (1986). Temporal aspects of spatial adaptation: A study of the tilt aftereffect. Vision Research, 26, 661-672.
29. Nawrot, M., & Blake, R. (1989). Neural integration of information specifying structure from stereopsis and motion. Science, 244, 716-718.
30. Palmer, S. E., & Bucher, N. M. (1981). Configural effects in perceived pointing of ambiguous triangles. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7, 88-114.
31. Pelton, L. H., & Solley, C. M. (1968). Acceleration of reversals of a Necker cube. American Journal of Psychology, 81, 585-588.
32. Petersik, T. J., Shepard, A., & Malsch, R. (1984). A three-dimensional motion after-effect produced by prolonged adaptation to a rotation simulation. Perception, 13, 489-497.
33. Pheiffer, C. H., Eure, S. B., & Hamilton, C. B. (1956). Reversible figures and eye movements. American Journal of Psychology, 69, 452-455.
34. Price, J. R. (1969). Studies of reversible perspective: A methodological review. Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation, 1, 102-106.
35. Reisberg, D., & O'Shaughnessy, M. (1984). Diverting subjects' concentration slows figural reversals. Perception, 13, 461-468.
36. Rock, I., & Mitchener, K. (1992). Further evidence of failure of reversal of ambiguous figures by uninformed subjects. Perception, 21, 39-45.
37. Sutherland, N. S. (1961). Figural aftereffects and apparent size. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 13, 222-228.
38. Thetford, P. (1963). Influence of massing and spacing on Necker cube reversals. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 16, 215-222.
39. Toppino, T. C., & Long, G. M. (1987). Selective adaptation with reversible figures: Don't change that channel. Perception & Psychophysics, 42, 37-48.
40. Vicholkovska, A. (1906). Illusions of reversible perspective. Psychological Review, 13, 276-290.
41. Virsu, V. (1975). Determination of perspective reversals. Nature, 257, 786-787.
42. von Grunau, M. W., Wiggin, S., & Reid, M. (1984). The local character of perspective organization. Perception & Psychophysics, 35, 319-324.
43. Yeh, S.-L., Chen, I.-P., De Valois, K. K., & De Valois, R. L. (1996). Figural after-effects and spatial attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 446-460.