Inhomogeneous surrounds, conflicting frameworks, and the double-anchoring theory of lightness

The empirical question of whether or not the lightness of a region is accounted for purely by the average luminance of its surround has a complex answer that depends on whether such a region is an increment, a decrement, or intermediate relative to the luminances of the contiguous surfaces. It is shown here that a new model of lightness, based on anchoring principles, predicts and clarifies such intricacies. In this model, the luminance of the target region determines its lightness in two ways: indirectly, by causing it to group with parts of its surround and thus defining the nested frameworks to which it belongs; and directly, by anchoring it to the highest luminance and to the average surround luminance in each of these frameworks. Inter- and intraindividual differences in lightness assessment are shown to emerge under grouping conditions that create unstable, conflicting frameworks.     

Time course of perceptual grouping by color

Does perceptual grouping operate early or late in visual processing? One position is that the elements in perceptual layouts are grouped early in vision, by properties of the retinal image, before perceptual constancies have been determined. A second position is that perceptual grouping operates on a postconstancy representation, one that is available only after stereoscopic depth perception, lightness constancy, and amodal completion have occurred. The present experiments indicate that grouping can operate on both a preconstancy representation and a postconstancy representation. Perceptual grouping was based on retinal color similarity at short exposure durations and based on surface color similarity at long durations. These results permit an integration of the preconstancy and postconstancy positions with regard to grouping by color.     

Transfer and Scaffolding of Perceptual Grouping Occurs Across Organizing Principles in 3- to 7-Month-Old Infants

ABSTRACT— Previous research has demonstrated that organizational principles become functional over different time courses of development: Lightness similarity is available at 3 months of age, but form similarity is not readily in evidence until 6 months of age. We investigated whether organization would transfer across principles and whether perceptual scaffolding can occur from an already functional principle to a not-yet-operational principle. Six- to 7-month-old infants (Experiment 1) and 3- to 4-month-old infants (Experiment 2) who were familiarized with arrays of elements organized by lightness similarity displayed a subsequent visual preference for a novel organization defined by form similarity. Results with the older infants demonstrate transfer in perceptual grouping: The organization defined by one grouping principle can direct a visual preference for a novel organization defined by a different grouping principle. Findings with the younger infants suggest that learning based on an already functional organizational process enables an organizational process that is not yet functional through perceptual scaffolding.     

When does grouping happen?

Recent research on perceptual grouping is described with particular emphasis on identifying the level(s) at which grouping factors operate. Contrary to the classical view of grouping as an early, two-dimensional, image-based process, recent experimental results show that it is strongly influenced by phenomena related to perceptual constancy, such as binocular depth perception, lightness constancy, amodal completion, and illusory contours. These findings imply that at least some grouping processes operate at the level of phenomenal perception rather than at the level of the retinal image. Preliminary evidence is reported showing that grouping can affect perceptual constancy, suggesting that grouping processes must also operate at an early, preconstancy level. If so, grouping may be a ubiquitous, ongoing aspect of visual organization that occurs for each level of representation rather than as a single stage that can be definitively localized relative to other perceptual processes.     

Amodal completion is modulated by lightness similarity

The strength of amodal completion is known to be modulated by contour relationships and global shape. Some researchers have shown that amodal completion also depends on surface similarity, but they have not distinguished the relative importance of similarity in surface representations either pre or post lightness constancy. In the experiments reported here, we aimed to determine whether amodal completion depends on processes that occur either before or after the establishment of lightness constancy. We used computer rendering techniques to vary the consistency of a cast shadow with a decrement in luminance on one side of a partially occluded surface. We found that perceived completion depended on the consistency of the decrement in surface luminance with the orientation of a cast shadow (Exp.?1). In Experiment ?2, we generated occluded surface fragments that could be either luminance-matched or lightness-matched to surface fragments on the opposite side of the occluder, and we found that the strength of amodal completion depended primarily on similarity in the perceived surface reflectance. In Experiments 3 and 4, we performed apparent-motion tasks to obtain converging evidence for grouping on the basis of perceived similarity in lightness. We found that matching surfaces in lightness significantly improved the apparent motion of surfaces behind an occluder, as compared with surfaces that were matched in contrast alone. These results suggest that amodal completion depends on the perceived similarity in lightness of partially occluded surface fragments.     

Rethinking perceptual organization: The role of uniform connectedness

A principle of perceptual organization, calleduniform connectedness (UC), is described, and a theoretical approach to perceptual organization is proposed in which this principle plays a fundamental role. The principle of UC states that closed regions of homogeneous properties—such as lightness, chromatic color, texture, and so forth—tend to be perceived initially as single units. We demonstrate its effects and show that they occur even when opposed by powerful grouping principles such as proximity and similarity. We argue that UC cannot be reduced to such grouping principles, because it is not a form of grouping at all. We then propose a theoretical framework within which UC accounts for the initial (orentry level) organization of the visual field into primitive units. Classical principles of grouping operate after UC, creating superordinate units consisting of two or more basic-level units. Parsing processes also operate after UC, dividing basic-level units into subordinate parts. UC in the retinal image is proposed to be a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition for unit formation, since connected elements on the retina that are perceived to lie in separate depth planes fail to be perceived as units. This fact, together with other evidence that the Gestalt principles of grouping are based onperceived (rather than retinal) relations, suggests that the organization of visual stimulation into UC objects is ultimately achieved within a relatively late, postconstancy representation of environmental surfaces. The implications of this possibility are discussed in light of present theories of visual perception.     

Visual training improves perceptual grouping based on basic stimulus features

Training on visual tasks improves performance on basic and higher order visual capacities. Such improvement has been linked to changes in connectivity among mediating neurons. We investigated whether training effects occur for perceptual grouping. It was hypothesized that repeated engagement of integration mechanisms would enhance grouping processes. Thirty-six participants underwent 15 sessions of training on a visual discrimination task that required perceptual grouping. Participants viewed 20?×?20 arrays of dots or Gabor patches and indicated whether the array appeared grouped as vertical or horizontal lines. Across trials stimuli became progressively disorganized, contingent upon successful discrimination. Four visual dimensions were examined, in which grouping was based on similarity in luminance, color, orientation, and motion. Psychophysical thresholds of grouping were assessed before and after training. Results indicate that performance in all four dimensions improved with training. Training on a control condition, which paralleled the discrimination task but without a grouping component, produced no improvement. In addition, training on only the luminance and orientation dimensions improved performance for those conditions as well as for grouping by color, on which training had not occurred. However, improvement from partial training did not generalize to motion. Results demonstrate that a training protocol emphasizing stimulus integration enhanced perceptual grouping. Results suggest that neural mechanisms mediating grouping by common luminance and/or orientation contribute to those mediating grouping by color but do not share resources for grouping by common motion. Results are consistent with theories of perceptual learning emphasizing plasticity in early visual processing regions.     

Perceptual Grouping: It's Later Than You Think

Recent research on perceptual grouping is described with particular emphasis on the level at which grouping factors operate. Contrary to the standard view of grouping as an early, two-dimensional, image-based process, experimental results show that it is strongly influenced by binocular depth perception, lightness constancy, amodal completion, and illusory figures. Such findings imply that at least some grouping processes operate at the level of conscious perception rather than the retinal image. Whether classical grouping processes also operate at an early, preconstancy level is an important, but currently unanswered question.     

The place of white in a world of grays: a double-anchoring theory of lightness perception

The specific gray shades in a visual scene can be derived from relative luminance values only when an anchoring rule is followed. The double-anchoring theory I propose in this article, as a development of the anchoring theory of Gilchrist et al. (1999), assumes that any given region (a) belongs to one or more frameworks, created by Gestalt grouping principles, and (b) is independently anchored, within each framework, to both the highest luminance and the surround luminance. The region's final lightness is a weighted average of the values computed, relative to both anchors, in all frameworks. The new model accounts not only for all lightness illusions that are qualitatively explained by the anchoring theory but also for a number of additional effects, and it does so quantitatively, with the support of mathematical simulations.     

Infant lightness perception: do 4-month-old infants follow Wallach's ratio rule?

When adults view a test disk embedded in a higher-luminance surround, the perceived lightness of the disk is largely determined by the surround-to-disk (S/D) luminance ratio (Wallach's ratio rule). Performance of 4-month-old infants tested with a forced-choice novelty-preference technique was consistent with predictions based on Wallach's ratio rule. This result suggests that the ability to extract and maintain information about local luminance ratios is present early in infancy. This ability is likely to contribute to the development of lightness constancy.     

Perceptual organization and attention

It is widely assumed that the grouping of the visual field first described by the Gestalt psychologists and the related phenomenon of texture segregation occur very early in the processing of visual information and involve preattentive processes. All the recent evidence supporting this assumption comes from visual search experiments in which the subject is actively looking for a target and attending to the stimulus. The question at issue is whether these kinds of patterns are perceived under conditions of inattention, i.e., when observers are not searching for them. We performed six experiments to determine whether texture segregation and grouping by similarity or proximity are perceived under conditions of inattention. On the first two trials subjects were asked to report the longer arm of a briefly presented cross which was surrounded by a pattern of ungrouped small elements. On the third trial and subsequent control trials these elements were configured into grouping patterns and subjects queried about them immediately following their line length reports. The results establish that neither texture segregation nor grouping by similarity of lightness or proximity are perceived under conditions of inattention. They support the conclusion that there is an earlier stage of processing than that referred to as preattentive.     

The effects of global grouping laws on surface lightness perception

Previous studies of lightness perception have shown that local surface grouping laws such as proximity and T junction were powerful determinants of target surface lightness. Recent lightness theories also emphasize the importance of local grouping of surfaces. In this study, we further examined the effects of three global grouping laws--symmetry, repetition, and alternation--on lightness perception. Local surface grouping laws such as proximity and good continuation were controlled across all of our stimulus displays. Participants' lightness perception consistently depended on a given surface's belongingness as determined by these laws--that is, global grouping laws affected a target surface's lightness perception. Our results indicate that global grouping laws determine a target surface's lightness when local surface grouping does not produce any distinct surface belongingness. Implications of our basic results are discussed in terms of a recent lightness theory.     

The time course of perceptual grouping: the role of segregation and shape formation

The time course of perceptual grouping was examined in two experiments, using a primed matching task. In different conditions, elements were grouped into columns/rows by common lightness, into a shape (triangle/ arrow or square/cross) by common lightness, and into a shape without segregation of elements. The results showed an early and rapid grouping into columns/rows by common lightness and into a shape when no segregation from other elements was involved. Goodness of shape (i.e., triangle/arrow vs. square/cross) had no influence on how early grouping was evident, but the relatively poorer shapes appeared to consolidate with time. In contrast, grouping into a shape that involved segregation and required resolving figure-ground relations between segregated units, as grouping into a shape by common lightness, consumed time, regardless of shape goodness. These results suggest that the time course of grouping varies as a function of the processes involved in it (e.g., segregation and shape formation) and the conditions prevailing for each process.     

Articulation in the context of edge classification

Many researchers believe the human visual system classifies luminance edges into those produced by reflectance edges or those produced by illumination edges, yet this classification process is not completely understood. One suggestion is that heuristics are used for edge classification. For example. specific contrast relationships at the luminance edge ('codirectional contrast invariance' and 'transversal luminance-ratio preserving') may distinguish an illumination edge from a reflectance edge on the one hand, and from a translucent edge on the other. Distinct from luminance junctions, these features are global characteristics of the luminance pattern that make distinguishing between different types of edge easier with more highly articulated scenes. I demonstrate that apparent translucency, nonreversing X-junctions, and single-reversing X-junctions are insufficient on their own to produce the lightness illusion of Adelson's well-known tile pattern. While tolerating violations of the codirectional contrast invariance and transversal-luminance-ratio presersving without reversing the sign of contrast, the visual system is quite sensitive to such contrast reversal at the luminance edge. I account for this by suggesting that humans process lightness in terms of an ordinal, rather than interval, (or ratio) scale.     

Lightness, equivalent backgrounds, and anchoring

Observers compared two center/surround configurations haploscopically. One configuration consisted of a standard surface surrounded by two, three, or four surfaces, each with a different luminance. The other configuration consisted of a comparison surface surrounded by a single annulus that varied in luminance. Center surfaces always had the same luminance but only appeared to have the same lightness with certain annuli (equivalent backgrounds). For most displays, the luminance needed to obtain an equivalent background was close to the highest luminance in the standard surround configuration. Models based on the space-average luminance or the space-average contrast of the standard surround configuration yielded poorer fits. Implications for computational models of lightness and for candidate solutions to the anchoring problem are discussed.     

Are some gestalt principles deployed more readily than others during early development? The case of lightness versus form similarity

Four experiments investigated how readily infants achieve perceptual organization by lightness and form similarity. Infants were (a) familiarized with elements that could be organized into rows or columns on the basis of lightness or form similarity and tested with vertical versus horizontal bars depicting the familiar versus novel organization or (b) familiarized with bars and tested with elements. For lightness similarity, generalization occurred in both tasks; however, for form similarity, generalization occurred only in the elements --> bars task. The findings indicate that lightness similarity is more readily deployed than form similarity and are discussed in the context of (a) whether the difference reflects speed of application or experience-based learning, (b) evidence from visual agnosic patients and the time course of application of the principles in healthy adults, and (c) development of dorsal and ventral visual processing streams.     

Lightness constancy: Ratio invariance and luminance profile

The term simultaneous lightness constancy describes the capacity of the visual system to perceive equal reflecting surfaces as having the same lightness despite lying in different illumination fields. In some cases, however, a lightness constancy failure occurs; that is, equal reflecting surfaces appear different in lightness when differently illuminated. An open question is whether the luminance profile of the illumination edges affects simultaneous lightness constancy even when the ratio invariance property of the illumination edges is preserved. To explore this issue, we ran two experiments by using bipartite illumination displays. Both the luminance profile of an illumination edge and the luminance ratio amplitude between the illumination fields were manipulated. Results revealed that the simultaneous lightness constancy increases when the luminance profile of the illumination edge is gradual (rather than sharp) and homogeneous (rather than inhomogeneous), whereas it decreases when the luminance ratio between the illumination fields is enlarged. The results are interpreted according to the layer decomposition schema, stating that the visual system splits the luminance into perceived lightness and apparent illumination components. We suggest that illumination edges having gradual and homogeneous luminance profiles facilitate the luminance decomposition process, whereas wide luminance ratios impede it.     

Perceived area and the luminosity threshold.

Observers made forced-choice opaque/luminous responses to targets of varying luminance and varying size presented (1) on the wall of a laboratory, (2) as a disk within an annulus, and (3) embedded within a Mondrian array presented within a vision tunnel. Lightness matches were also made for nearby opaque surfaces. The results show that the threshold luminance value at which a target begins to appear self-luminous increases with its size, defined as perceived size, not retinal size. More generally, the larger the target, the more an increase in its luminance induces grayness/blackness into the surround and the less it induces luminosity into the target, and vice versa. Corresponding to this luminosity/grayness tradeoff, there appears to be an invariant: Across a wide variety of conditions, a target begins to appear luminous when its luminance is about 1.7 times that of a surface that would appear white in the same illumination. These results show that the luminosity threshold behaves like a surface lightness value--the maximum lightness value, in fact--and is subject to the same laws of anchoring (such as the area rule proposed by Li & Gilchrist, 1999) as surface lightness.     

Perceived area and the luminosity threshold

Observers made forced-choice opaque/luminous responses to targets of varying luminance and varying size presented (1) on the wall of a laboratory, (2) as a disk within an annulus, and (3) embedded within a Mondrian array presented within a vision tunnel. Lightness matches were also made for nearby opaque surfaces. The results show that the threshold luminance value at which a target begins to appear self-luminous increases with its size, defined as perceived size, not retinal size. More generally, the larger the target, the more an increase in its luminance induces grayness/blackness into the surround and the less it induces luminosity into the target, and vice versa. Corresponding to this luminosity/grayness tradeoff, there appears to be an invariant: Across a wide variety of conditions, a target begins to appear luminous when its luminance is about 1.7 times that of a surface that would appear white in the same illumination. These results show that the luminosity threshold behaves like a surface lightness value—the maximum lightness value, in fact—and is subject to the same laws of anchoring (such as the area rule proposed by Li & Gilchrist, 1999) as surface lightness.     

Simultaneous lightness contrast on plain and articulated surrounds

Simultaneous lightness contrast is stronger when the dark and light backgrounds of the classic display (where one of the targets is an increment and the other is a decrement) are replaced by articulated fields of equivalent average luminances. Although routinely attributed to articulation per se, this effect may simply result from the increase in highest luminance in the light articulated, vs plain, background; by locally darkening the decremental target, such an increase would amplify the difference between the targets. We disentangled the effects of highest luminance and articulation by measuring, separately, the magnitude of lightness contrast on dark and light plain and articulated backgrounds. We found that highest luminance and articulation contribute separately to the final illusion.