Contrasting Three Popular Explanations for the Muller-Lyer Illusion

@inproceedings{Woloszyn2010ContrastingTP,
  title={Contrasting Three Popular Explanations for the Muller-Lyer Illusion},
  author={Michael R. Woloszyn},
  year={2010}
}
Problem statement: Using the method of adjustment, participants compared the line lengths of ‘dumbbell’ and ‘spectacle’ versions of Muller-Lyer (circles and ovals at the endpoints in place of arrowheads). Approach: Three popular competing explanations for the illusion (conflicting cues, misapplied size constancy scaling and confusion hypothesis) make differing predictions concerning the pattern of change in illusion strength when the bounding elements are varied. Results: PSEs were computed… CONTINUE READING

Figures and Tables from this paper.

References

Publications referenced by this paper.
SHOWING 1-10 OF 17 REFERENCES

The roles of inducer size and distance in the Ebbinghaus illusion ( Titchener circles )

J. O. Robinson
  • Perception
  • 2005

Natural and artificial cues , perceptual compromise and the basis of veridical and illusory perception

D. Vickers, P. L. Smith, P. R. Delucia, J. Hochberg
  • Human Information Processing : Measures , Mechanisms and Models .
  • 1989