Abstract
The role of local and global visual mechanisms in individual differences in the rod-and-frame (RF) effect was investigated. Field-dependent and field-independent observers, selected on the basis of Witkin and Asch’s (1948) classical procedure, were submitted to the small RF test (Coren & Hoy, 1986). Four frame tilts and two gap sizes were used. As expected, direct effects (i.e., rod settings in the direction of frame tilt) were observed at small degrees of frame tilt, while indirect effects (i.e., rod settings in the direction opposite that of frame tilt) were observed at larger frame tilts. Fielddependent observers showed larger direct effects in the case of the small gap. Indirect effects were comparable in both field-dependent and field-independent subjects, regardless of gap size. Following the model proposed by Wenderoth and Johnstone (1987), these findings indicate that low-level visual mechanisms, responsible for local orientation interactions, have a different gain in fielddependent and field-independent individuals. In contrast, global visual mechanisms, presumably acting
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allman, J. M., Miezin, F., &McGuinness, E. (1985). Stimulus specific responses from beyond the classical receptive field: Neurophysiological mechanisms for local-global comparisons in visual neurones.Annual Review of Neuroscience,8, 407–430.
Asch, S. E., &Witkin, H. A. (1948). Studies in space orientation: I. Perception of the upright with displaced visual fields.Journal of Experimental Psychology,38, 325–337.
Beh, H. C., Wenderoth, P. M., &Purcell, A. T. (1971). The angular function of a rod-and-frame illusion.Perception & Psychophysics,9(4), 353–355.
Carpenter, R. H. S., &Blakemore, C. (1973). Interactions between orientations in human vision.Experimental Brain Research,18, 287–303.
Coren, S., &Hoy, V. S. (1986). An orientation illusion analog to the rod and frame: Relational effects in the magnitude of the distortion.Perception & Psychophysics,39, 159–163.
Ebenholtz, S. M. (1977). Determinants of the rod and frame effect: The role of retinal size.Perception & Psychophysics,22, 531–538.
Ebenholtz, S. M., &Callan, J. W. (1980). Modulation of the rod and frame effects: Retinal angle vs. apparent size.Psychological Research,42, 327–334.
Goodenough, D. R., Cox, P. W., Sigman, E., &Strawderman, W. E. (1985). A cognitive-style conception of the field-dependence dimension.Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive,5, 687–706.
Goodenough, D. R., Oltman, P. K., &Cox, P. W. (1987). The nature of individual differences in field dependence.Journal of Research in Personality,21, 81–99.
Goodenough, D. R., Oltman, P. K., Sigman, E., Rosso, J., &Mertz, H. (1979). Orientation contrast effects in the rod-and-frame test.Perception & Psychophysics,25, 419–424.
Goodenough, D. R., Sigman, E., Oltman, P. K., Rosso, J., &Mertz, H. (1979). Eye torsion in response to a tilted visual stimulus.Vision Research,19, 1177–1179.
Immergluck, L. (1966). Resistance to an optical illusion, figural after-effects, and field dependence.Psychonomic Science,6, 281–282.
Johnstone, S., &Wenderoth, P. (1989). Spatial and orientation specific integration in the tilt illusion.Perception,18, 5–23.
Pizzamiglio, L., &Zoccolotti, P. (1981). Sex and cognitive influence on visual hemifield superiority for face and letter recognition.Cortex,17, 215–226.
T’so, D. Y., Gilbert, C. D., &Wiesel, T. N. (1986). Relationships between horizontal interactions and functional architecture in cat striate cortex revealed by cross-correlational analysis.Journal of Neuroscience,6, 1160–1170.
Wenderoth, P., &Beh, H. (1977). Component analysis of orientation illusions.Perception,6, 57–75.
Wenderoth, P., &Johnstone, S. (1987). Possible neural substrates for orientation analysis and perception.Perception,16, 693–709.
Wenderoth, P., &Johnstone, S. (1988a). The differential effects of brief exposures and surrounding contours on direct and indirect tilt illusion.Perception,17, 165–176.
Wenderoth, P., &Johnstone, S. (1988b). The different mechanisms of the direct and indirect tilt illusions.Vision Research,28, 301–312.
Wenderoth, P., &van der Zwan, R. (1991). Local and global mech anisms of one- and two-dimensional orientation illusions.Perception & Psychophysics,50, 321–332.
Wenderoth, P., van der Zwan, R., &Johnstone, S. (1989). Orientation illusion by briefly flashed plaids.Perception,18, 715–728.
Witkin, H. A. (1978).Cognitive styles in personal and cultural adaptation. Worcester, MA: Clark University Press.
Witkin, H. A., &Asch, S. E. (1948). Studies in space orientation: IV. Further experiments on perception of the upright with displaced visual fields.Journal of Experimental Psychology,38, 762–782.
Witkin, H. A., & Goodenough, D. R. (1981). Cognitive styles: Essence and origins.Psychological Issues, Monograph51.
Zoccolotti, P., Antonucci, G., Goodenough, D., Pizzamiglio, L., &Spinelli, D. (1992). The role of frame size on upright and tilted observers in the rod and frame test.Acta Psychologica,72, 171–187.
Zoccolotti, P., Antonucci, G., &Spinelli, D. (1993). The gap between rod and frame influences the rod-and-frame effect with small and large inducing displays.Perception & Psychophysics,54, 14–19.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche and Ministero della Pubblica Istruzione grants to D.S. and P.Z.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Spinelli, D., Spinelli, D., Antonucci, G. et al. Local and global visual mechanisms underlying individual differences in the rod-and-frame illusion. Perception & Psychophysics 57, 915–920 (1995). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206806
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206806