Moon illusion in pictures: a multimechanism approach

The existence of the moon illusion in pictorial representations was demonstrated in 6 experiments. Ss either judged the size of the moon in pictures, depicted as on the horizon or high in the sky, or drew horizon and elevated moons. The horizon moon was consistently judged to be larger than the elevated moon, independent of the angle at which the pictures are viewed. The distance paradox usually observed with the moon illusion (horizon moon apparently closer than the elevated moon) also exists in pictures. The magnitude of both size and distance effects depends on the salience of depicted depth cues. The pattern of results suggests that the moon illusion is caused by several interacting mechanisms and that use of pictorial stimuli may allow the separation of various cognitive from physiological contributions to the illusion.     

The horizon line, linear perspective, interposition, and background brightness as determinants of the magnitude of the pictorial moon illusion

A total of 110 undergraduate students participated in a series of three experiments that explored the magnitude of the moon illusion in pictures. Experiment 1 examined the role of the number and salience of depth cues and background brightness. Experiment 2 examined the role of the horizon line, linear perspective, interposition, and background brightness. In Experiment 3, comparative distance judgments of the moon as a function of linear perspective, interposition, and the size of the standard moon were obtained. The magnitude of the moon illusion increased as a function of the number and salience of depth cues and changes in background brightness. Experiment 2 failed to support the role of the horizon line in affecting the illusion. Experiment 3 provided additional support for the illusory distance component of the moon illusion.     

Oculomotor Effects in the Size-Distance Paradox and the Moon Illusion

Drawing on 2 concepts—the resting position of the eyes and a binocular geometry for perceived size, the moon illusion is explained as the consequence of different oculomotor adjustments caused by change in the direction of gaze contingent upon the viewing conditions of the moon. Hence, each particular moon will be viewed with a different vergence state which, in turn, yields a different amount of binocular disparity. The vergence state will determine the perceived size of an object whereas disparity will determine its perceived distance. It is further contended that the perceived size of the moon is based on a new binocular information source for size perception enabling the size of an object to be perceived even in the absence of egocentric distance information. Discussion focuses on the paradoxical aspect of the moon illusion and how the size-distance invariance hypothesis may have contributed to its effect.     

Size illusion, distance illusion, and terrestrial passage: comment on reed

Two assumptions of Reed's (1984) terrestrial passage theory are questioned. First, Reed assumes that the moon's failure to increase in visual subtense while elevating is accounted for strictly by perceptual distancing. This allows a formal account of the moon distance illusion, but at the expense of a compelling explanation of the moon size illusion. Second, in order to explain the distance illusion, Reed assumes that all objects, regardless of their perceived altitude, are perceived to start from a common point at the horizon. Several alternative application of Reed's terrestrial-passage foundation to the actual illusions are suggested.     

Moon illusion simulated in complete darkness: planetarium experiment reexamined

In 1962, Kaufman and Rock reported that the moon illusion did not occur in the darkness of a planetarium or in a completely dark room. The present study reexamined their findings. Two pairs of light points, separated by 3.5 degrees, were presented on the dome screen of a planetarium. Subjects compared the distance between the two light points presented in the horizontal direction with the distance between the two light points at the zenith. Three illumination conditions were used: The inside of the planetarium was completely dark, was lighted, or was projected with the silhouette of a city under a starry sky. The effect of eye elevation on the illusion was also examined. Contrary to Kaufman and Rock's results, a size discrepancy comparable to the moon illusion was obtained in the horizon-and-stars condition and even in the complete-darkness condition. Little or no illusion was obtained in the lighted-room condition. The results also showed that eye elevation affected the magnitude of the illusion.     

The Moses, mega-Moses, and Armstrong illusions: integrating language comprehension and semantic memory

This study develops a new theory of the Moses illusion, observed in responses to general knowledge questions such as, "How many animals of each kind did Moses take on the Ark?" People often respond "two" rather than "zero" despite knowing that Noah, not Moses, launched the Ark. Our theory predicted two additional types of conceptual error demonstrated here: the Armstrong and mega-Moses illusions. The Armstrong illusion involved questions resembling, "What was the famous line uttered by Louis Armstrong when he first set foot on the moon?" People usually comprehend such questions as valid, despite knowing that Louis Armstrong was a jazz musician who never visited the moon. This Armstrong illusion was not due to misperceiving the critical words (Louis Armstrong), and occurred as frequently as the Moses illusion (with critical words embedded in identical sentential contexts), but less frequently than the mega-Moses illusion caused when Moses and Armstrong factors were combined.     

A test of size-scaling and relative-size hypotheses for the moon illusion

In two experiments participants reproduced the size of the moon in pictorial scenes under two conditions: when the scene element was normally oriented, producing a depth gradient like a floor, or when the scene element was inverted, producing a depth gradient like a ceiling. Target moons were located near to or far from the scene element. Consistent with size constancy scaling, the illusion reversed when the "floor" of a pictorial scene was inverted to represent a "ceiling." Relative size contrast predicted a reduction or increase in the illusion with no change in direction. The relation between pictorial and natural moon illusions is discussed.     

The moon illusion: I. How high is the sky?

The most common explanations of the moon illusion assume that the moon is seen at a specific distance in the sky, which is perceived as a definite surface. A decrease in the apparent distance to the sky with increasing elevation presumably leads to a corresponding decrease in apparent size. In Experiment 1 observers (N = 24) gave magnitude estimates of the distance to the night sky at different elevations. The results did not support the flattened-dome hypothesis. In Experiment 2 observers (N = 20) gave magnitude estimates of the distance to the sky at points around a 360 degrees circle just above the horizon. The results were consistent with those of Experiment 1, and in addition, estimates were highly correlated with the physical distances of buildings at the horizon. In a third, control experiment, observers (N = 20) gave magnitude estimates of the distances of buildings at the horizon. A power function fit the relation between estimated and physical distance (exponent = 1.17) as well as the relation between estimates of the sky points above the buildings (Experiment 2) and estimates of building distances (exponent = .46). Taken together, the results disconfirm all theories that attribute the moon illusion to a "sky illusion" of the sort exemplified by the flattened-dome hypothesis.     

A simple but powerful theory of the moon illusion

Modification of Restle's theory (1970) explains the moon illusion and related phenomena on the basis of three principles: (1) The apparent sizes of objects are their perceived visual angles. (2) The apparent size of the moon is determined by the ratio of the angular extent of the moon relative to the extents subtended by objects composing the surrounding context, such as the sky and things on the ground. (3) The visual extents subtended by common objects of a constant physical size decrease systematically with increasing distance from the observer. Further development of this theory requires specification of both the components of the surrounding context and their relative importance in determining the apparent size and distance of the moon.     

Terrestrial passage theory of the moon illusion

Theories of the celestial, or moon, illusion have neglected geometric characteristics of movement along and above the surface of the earth. The illusion occurs because the characteristics of terrestrial passage are attributed to celestial passage. In terrestrial passage, the visual angle subtended by an object changes discriminably as an essentially invariant function of elevation above the horizon. In celestial passage, by contrast, change in visual angle is indiscriminable at all elevations. If a terrestrial object gains altitude, its angular subtense fails to follow the expansion projected for an orbital course: Angular diminution or constancy is equivalent to distancing. On the basis of terrestrial projections, a similar failure of celestial objects in successive elevations is also equivalent to distancing. The illusion occurs because of retinal image constancy, not--as traditionally stated--despite it.     

The overestimation of vertical distance and slope and its role in the moon illusion

Six experiments were conducted to test the hypothesis that overestimation of vertical distance is a pervasive phenomenon. The experiments involved judgments of: (a) vertical distance looking upward; (b) vertical distance looking downward; (c) the slope of a real hill; (d) the recalled slopes of streets; (e) the magnitudes of angles drawn on paper; (f) the distances to afterimages projected into the sky. The results showed that a very strong illusion of overestimation of both vertical distance and slope occurred in all situations except for the judgments of drawn angles by males. Furthermore, in five of the six experiments females showed a greater amount of the illusion than males. The discussion pointed out the difficulty of explaining the moon illusion by the assumptions of a flattened sky surface and Emmert’s law in light of the data.     

Underestimation of length by subjects in motion.

To check a prior observation, in the present experiment, subjects made estimates of the lengths of both the guidelines and the spaces between guidelines on automotive highways so the magnitude of the illusion could be more accurately determined. Ten males and ten females were individually tested at 0 and 60 mph. At 60 mph, spaces were estimated with an error of 85%; lines were estimated with an error of 72%. Combining data for both stimuli, an error of 78% results, which corresponds to underestimation by a factor of 4.67. This illusory effect is considerably greater than that of the moon illusion, considered by many the most powerful of the classical illusions.     

Anisotropic perception of visual angle: implications for the horizontal-vertical illusion, overconstancy of size, and the moon illusion.

Three experiments investigated anisotropic perception of visual angle outdoors. In Experiment 1, scales for vertical and horizontal visual angles ranging from 20 degrees to 80 degrees were constructed with the method of angle production (in which the subject reproduced a visual angle with a protractor) and the method of distance production (in which the subject produced a visual angle by adjusting viewing distance). In Experiment 2, scales for vertical and horizontal visual angles of 5 degrees-30 degrees were constructed with the method of angle production and were compared with scales for orientation in the frontal plane. In Experiment 3, vertical and horizontal visual angles of 3 degrees-80 degrees were judged with the method of verbal estimation. The main results of the experiments were as follows: (1) The obtained angles for visual angle are described by a quadratic equation, theta' = a + b theta + c theta 2 (where theta is the visual angle; theta', the obtained angle; a, b, and c, constants). (2) The linear coefficient b is larger than unity and is steeper for vertical direction than for horizontal direction. (3) The quadratic coefficient c is generally smaller than zero and is negatively larger for vertical direction than for horizontal direction. And (4) the obtained angle for visual angle is larger than that for orientation. From these results, it was possible to predict the horizontal-vertical illusion, over-constancy of size, and the moon illusion.     

Anisotropic perception of visual angle: Implications for the horizontal-vertical illusion,overconstancy of size,and the moon illusion

Three experiments investigated anisotropic perception of visual angle outdoors. In Experiment 1, scales for vertical and horizontal visual angles ranging from 20° to 80° were constructed with the method of angle production (in which the subject reproduced a visual angle with a protractor) and the method of distance production (in which the subject produced a visual angle by adjusting viewing distance). In Experiment 2, scales for vertical and horizontal visual angles of 5°–30° were constructed with the method of angle production and were compared with scales for orientation in the frontal plane. In Experiment 3, vertical and horizontal visual angles of 3°-80° were judged with the method of verbal estimation. The main results of the experiments were as follows: (1) The obtained angles for visual angle are described by a quadratic equation, θ′=a+bθ+cθ² (where θ is the visual angle; θ′, the obtained angle;a, b, andc, constants). (2) The linear coefficientb is larger than unity and is steeper for vertical direction than for horizontal direction. (3) The quadratic coefficientc is generally smaller than zero and is negatively larger for vertical direction than for horizontal direction. And (4) the obtained angle for visual angle is larger than that for orientation. From these results, it was possible to predict the horizontal-vertical illusion, over-constancy of size, and the moon illusion.     

面孔空想性错视及其神经机制

面孔空想性错视, 是指在不存在面孔的物体或抽象图案上看到面孔, 例如在月球表面看到面孔。它受到自下而上信息与自上而下加工的共同影响。近年来, 研究者通过行为实验、事件相关电位技术以及脑成像技术对不同的空想性错视影响因素进行研究。结果发现, 面孔空想性错视的产生取决于刺激是否包含类似面孔结构, 内部面孔模板是否能与当前刺激匹配, 以及有无面孔相关背景。同时也受到个体差异与情绪状态影响。脑成像研究发现, 在发生空想性错视时, 来自额叶区与枕叶视觉区的信息会在FFA进行整合。未来研究可以致力于探索面孔空想性错视中个体差异的行为与神经机制, 以及不同类型的自上而下调节之间的相互影响及其神经机制。     

Last but not least.

New variations of the spiral illusion are demonstrated. They include spiral illusions of the Café Wall illusion and the Z?llner illusion, as well as other new orientation illusions. Thus the spiral illusion is not limited to the Fraser illusion. We discuss the role that detectors of spirals in a higher visual area might play in the spiral illusion.     

Historical Epistemology or History of Epistemology? The Case of the Relation Between Perception and Judgment Dedicated to Günther Patzig on his 85th birthday

This essay aims to sharpen debates on the pros and cons of historical epistemology, which is now understood as a novel approach to the study of knowledge, by comparing it with the history of epistemology as traditionally pursued by philosophers. The many versions of both approaches are not always easily discernable. Yet, a reasoned comparison of certain versions can and should be made. In the first section of this article, I argue that the most interesting difference involves neither the subject matter nor goal, but the methods used by the two approaches. In the second section, I ask which of the two approaches or methods is more promising given that both historical epistemologists and historians of epistemology claim to contribute to epistemology simpliciter. Using traditional problems concerning the epistemic role of perception, I argue that the historical epistemologies of Wartofsky and Daston and Galison fail to show that studying practices of perception is philosophically significant. Standard methods from the history of epistemology are more promising, as I show by means of reconstructing arguments in a debate about the relation between perception and judgment in psychological research on the famous moon illusion.     

The moving rubber hand illusion revisited: Comparing movements and visuotactile stimulation to induce illusory ownership

The rubber hand illusion is a perceptual illusion in which a model hand is experienced as part of one’s own body. In the present study we directly compared the classical illusion, based on visuotactile stimulation, with a rubber hand illusion based on active and passive movements. We examined the question of which combinations of sensory and motor cues are the most potent in inducing the illusion by subjective ratings and an objective measure (proprioceptive drift). In particular, we were interested in whether the combination of afferent and efferent signals in active movements results in the same illusion as in the purely passive modes. Our results show that the illusion is equally strong in all three cases. This demonstrates that different combinations of sensory input can lead to a very similar phenomenological experience and indicates that the illusion can be induced by any combination of multisensory information.     

情感预测中的聚焦错觉

聚焦错觉是个体在进行情感预测时,错误地估计了聚焦事件会对情绪造成影响的一种倾向.聚焦错觉是造成情感预测偏差的重要原因.其心理机制主要包括直觉预测和可得性模型.聚焦错觉的影响因素主要有预测事件的情感效价、性质,情境因素、个体习惯和文化差异等.其应对策略主要有去焦点化和情感平均.未来的研究应从聚焦错觉与忽视情绪适应的关系、聚焦错觉的产生根源以及聚焦错觉与其他聚焦效应的关系等方面来进一步探讨.     

A tactile illusion: The rotating hourglass

A new tactile (more properly termed haptic) illusion, the rotating hourglass, was investigated in the laboratory by rotating a rod end for end between the S’s thumb and forefinger. This illusion, which is an apparent decrease in the diameter of the rod at the point of contact with the fingers, was easily observed by 19 of the 20 Ss. When the illusion was studied as a function of time, the magnitude of the illusion increased over time with a mean decrease in apparent diameter of 52.3% from the beginning to the end of the 38-sec trials. A theory of differential adaptation of the skin is postulated to explain the rotating hourglass illusion and a similar illusion.