Interocular induction of illusory size perception

BMC Neuroscience

Volumn 12, Issue , 2011, Pages

  Song, Chen ^a,b   Schwarzkopf, D Samuel ^a,b   Rees, Geraint ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BINOCULAR VISION; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; ILLUSORY SIZE PERCEPTION; LATERAL GENICULATE NUCLEUS; MALE; NERVE CELL; NORMAL HUMAN; VISION; VISUAL CORTEX; VISUAL STIMULATION; VISUAL SYSTEM FUNCTION; DEPTH PERCEPTION; HEMISPHERIC DOMINANCE; LEARNING; METHODOLOGY; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TEST; PERCEPTION; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; REACTION TIME; STATISTICS; VISUAL ILLUSION;

ADULT; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; HUMANS; MALE; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS; OPTICAL ILLUSIONS; PHOTIC STIMULATION; REACTION TIME; SIZE PERCEPTION; SPACE PERCEPTION; STATISTICS AS TOPIC; TRANSFER (PSYCHOLOGY); YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79952470940     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712202     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2202-12-27     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Fisher GH. Detection of visual stimuli located within angles. Nature 1967, 215:553-554. 10.1038/215553a0, 6057938.
2. Massaro DW, Anderson NH. Judgmental model of the Ebbinghaus illusion. Journal of Experimental Psychology 1971, 89:147-151. 10.1037/h0031158, 5569620.
3. Franz VH, Scharnowski F, Gegenfurtner KR. Illusion Effects on Grasping Are Temporally Constant Not Dynamic. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2005, 31:1359-1378. 10.1037/0096-1523.31.6.1359, 16366795.
4. Murray SO, Boyaci H, Kersten D. The representation of perceived angular size in human primary visual cortex. Nature Neuroscience 2006, 9:429-434. 10.1038/nn1641, 16462737.
5. Fang F, Boyaci H, Kersten D, Murray SO. Attention-Dependent Representation of a Size Illusion in Human V1. Current Biology 2008, 18:1707-1712. 10.1016/j.cub.2008.09.025, 2638992, 18993076.
6. Hubel DH, Wiesel TN. Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat's visual cortex. Journal of Physiology 1962, 160:106-154. 1359523, 14449617.
7. Hubel DH, Wiesel TN. Receptive fields and functional architecture of monkey striate cortex. Journal of Physiology 1968, 195:215-243. 1557912, 4966457.
8. Adams DL, Sincich LC, Horton JC. Complete pattern of ocular dominance columns in human primary visual cortex. Journal of Neuroscience 2007, 27:10391-10403. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2923-07.2007, 17898211.
9. Steiner V, Blake R, Rose D. Interocular transfer of expansion, rotation, and translation motion after effects. Perception 1994, 23:1197-1202. 10.1068/p231197, 7899035.
10. Maffei L, Berardi N, Bisti S. Interocular transfer of adaptation after effect in neurons of area 17 and 18 of split chiasm cats. Journal of Neurophysiology 1986, 55:966-976.
11. Leibowitz HW, Judisch JM. The relation between age and the magnitude of the Ponzo illusion. American Journal of Psychology 1967, 80:105-109. 10.2307/1420548, 6036344.
12. Campbell F, Green DG. Monocular versus binocular visual acuity. Nature 1965, 208:191-192. 10.1038/208191a0, 5884255.
13. Blake R, Fox R. The psychophysical inquiry into binocular summation. Perception and Psychophysics 1973, 14:161-185.
14. Tsutsui KI, Sakata T. Neural mechanisms of three-dimensional vision. Neuroscience Research 2005, 51:221-229. 10.1016/j.neures.2004.11.006, 15710485.
15. Roe AW, Parker AJ, Born RT, DeAngelis GC. Disparity channels in early vision. Journal of Neuroscience 2007, 27:11820-11831. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4164-07.2007, 2376798, 17978018.
16. Li Z. A neural model of contour integration in the primary visual cortex. Neural Computation 1998, 10:903-940. 10.1162/089976698300017557, 9573412.
17. Dumoulin SO, Wandell BA. Population receptive field estimates in human visual cortex. NeuroImage 2008, 39:647-660. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.09.034, 17977024.
18. Huang PC, Hess RF, Dakin SC. Flank facilitation and contour integration: different sites. Vision Research 2006, 46:3699-3706. 10.1016/j.visres.2006.04.025, 16806389.
19. Wade NJ. The influence of colour and contour rivalry on the magnitude of the tit illusion. Vision Research 1980, 20:229-233. 10.1016/0042-6989(80)90107-8, 7385596.
20. Polat U, Sagi D. Lateral interactions between spatial channels: suppression and facilitation revealed by lateral masking experiments. Vision Research 1993, 33:993-997. 10.1016/0042-6989(93)90081-7, 8506641.
21. Polat U, Sagi D. The architecture of perceptual spatial interactions. Vision Research 1994, 34:73-78. 10.1016/0042-6989(94)90258-5, 8116270.
22. Schwartz O, Sejnowski TJ, Dayan P. Perceptual organization in the tilt illusion. Journal of Vision 2009, 9:1-20. 10.1167/9.4.19, 2852324, 19757928.
23. Hirsch JA, Gilbert CD. Synaptic physiology of horizontal connections in the cat's visual cortex. Journal of Neuroscience 1991, 11:1800-1809.
24. Ts'o DY, Gilbert CD, Wiesel TN. Relationships between horizontal interactions and functional architecture in cat striate cortex as revealed by cross-correlation analysis. Journal of Neuroscience 1986, 6:1160-1170.
25. Weliky M, Kandler K, Fitzpatrick D, Katz LC. Patterns of excitation and inhibition evoked by horizontal connections in visual cortex share a common relationship to orientation columns. Neuron 1995, 15:541-552. 10.1016/0896-6273(95)90143-4, 7546734.
26. Bosking WH, Zhang Y, Schofield B, Fitzpatrick D. Orientation selectivity and the arrangement of horizontal connections in tree shrew striate cortex. Journal of Neuroscience 1997, 17:2112-2127.
27. Chisum HJ, Mooser F, Fitzpatrick D. Emergent properties of layer 2/3 neurons reflect the collinear arrangement of horizontal connections in tree shrew visual cortex. Journal of Neuroscience 2003, 23:2947-2960.
28. Brainard DH. The Psychophysics Toolbox. Spatial Vision 1997, 10:433-436. 10.1163/156856897X00357, 9176952.