Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Experimental Brain Research 3/2006

01-05-2006 | Research Note

Grasp effects of the Ebbinghaus illusion are ambiguous

Authors: R. Gilster, J. P. Kuhtz-Buschbeck, C. D. Wiesner, R. Ferstl

Published in: Experimental Brain Research | Issue 3/2006

Login to get access

Abstract

The assumption that the Ebbinghaus/Titchener illusion deceives perception but not grasping, which would confirm the two-visual-systems hypothesis (TVSH) as proposed by Milner and Goodale (The visual brain in action, 1995), has recently been challenged. Franz et al. (Exp Brain Res 149:470–477, 2003) found that the illusion affects both perception and grasping, and showed that the effect of the illusion on the peak grip aperture (PGA) cannot be accounted for by different sizes of the gap that separates the central target disk from the surrounding flankers. However, it is not yet clear if the presence of flankers per se influences grasping. We therefore compared kinematic parameters of prehension, using the Ebbinghaus illusion, and a neutral control condition where normal subjects grasped a disk without any flankers. In accordance with the well-known effects of the illusion on perceived size, the PGA was smaller when the target disk was surrounded by large flankers, and larger when it was encircled by small flankers. However, the largest PGA values were reached in the neutral control condition. Hence the presence of flankers leads to a general reduction of the PGA, possibly because the flankers are regarded as obstacles. This ‘reduction effect’ casts doubts on how appropriate it is to directly compare perceptual measures and PGA values when using the Ebbinghaus illusion. Even smaller effects of the illusion on the PGA compared to larger perceptual effects cannot be unequivocally interpreted.
Literature
go back to reference Aglioti S, DeSouza JFX, Goodale MA (1995) Size-contrast illusions deceive the eye but not the hand. Curr Biol 5:679–685CrossRefPubMed Aglioti S, DeSouza JFX, Goodale MA (1995) Size-contrast illusions deceive the eye but not the hand. Curr Biol 5:679–685CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Bernardis P, Knox P, Bruno N (2005) How does action resist visual illusion? Uncorrected oculomotor information does not account for accurate pointing in peripersonal space. Exp Brain Res 162:133–144CrossRefPubMed Bernardis P, Knox P, Bruno N (2005) How does action resist visual illusion? Uncorrected oculomotor information does not account for accurate pointing in peripersonal space. Exp Brain Res 162:133–144CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Biegstraaten M, Smeets JBJ, Brenner E (2003) The influence of obstacles on the speed of grasping. Exp Brain Res 149:530–534PubMed Biegstraaten M, Smeets JBJ, Brenner E (2003) The influence of obstacles on the speed of grasping. Exp Brain Res 149:530–534PubMed
go back to reference Bruno N, Bernardis P (2003) When does action resist visual illusions? Effector position modulates illusory influences on motor responses. Exp Brain Res 151(2):225–237CrossRefPubMed Bruno N, Bernardis P (2003) When does action resist visual illusions? Effector position modulates illusory influences on motor responses. Exp Brain Res 151(2):225–237CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Coren S, Girgus JS (1978) Seeing is deceiving. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale Coren S, Girgus JS (1978) Seeing is deceiving. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale
go back to reference Franz VH (2003) Manual size estimation: a neuropsychological measure of perception? Exp Brain Res 151:471–477CrossRefPubMed Franz VH (2003) Manual size estimation: a neuropsychological measure of perception? Exp Brain Res 151:471–477CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Franz VH, Gegenfurtner KR, Bülthoff HH, Fahle M (2000) No evidence for a dissociation between perception and action. Psychol Sci 11:20–25CrossRefPubMed Franz VH, Gegenfurtner KR, Bülthoff HH, Fahle M (2000) No evidence for a dissociation between perception and action. Psychol Sci 11:20–25CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Franz VH, Bülthoff HH, Fahle M (2003) Grasp effects of the Ebbinghaus illusion: obstacle avoidance is not the explanation. Exp Brain Res 149:470–477PubMed Franz VH, Bülthoff HH, Fahle M (2003) Grasp effects of the Ebbinghaus illusion: obstacle avoidance is not the explanation. Exp Brain Res 149:470–477PubMed
go back to reference Gentilucci M, Chieffi S, Daprati E, Saetti MC, Toni I (1996) Visual illusion and action. Neuropsychologia 34:369–376CrossRefPubMed Gentilucci M, Chieffi S, Daprati E, Saetti MC, Toni I (1996) Visual illusion and action. Neuropsychologia 34:369–376CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference de Grave DDJ, Biegstraaten M, Smeets JBJ, Brenner E (2005) Effects of the Ebbinghaus figure on grasping are not only due to misjudged size. Exp Brain Res 163:58–64CrossRefPubMed de Grave DDJ, Biegstraaten M, Smeets JBJ, Brenner E (2005) Effects of the Ebbinghaus figure on grasping are not only due to misjudged size. Exp Brain Res 163:58–64CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Grosskopf A, Kuhtz-Buschbeck JP (2006) Grasping with the left and right hand: a kinematic study. Exp Brain Res 168:230–240CrossRefPubMed Grosskopf A, Kuhtz-Buschbeck JP (2006) Grasping with the left and right hand: a kinematic study. Exp Brain Res 168:230–240CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Haffenden AM, Goodale MA (1998) The effect of pictorial illusion on prehension and perception. J Cogn Neurosci 10:122–136CrossRefPubMed Haffenden AM, Goodale MA (1998) The effect of pictorial illusion on prehension and perception. J Cogn Neurosci 10:122–136CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Haffenden AM, Goodale MA (2000) Independent effects of pictorial displays on perception and action. Vision Res 40:1597–1607CrossRefPubMed Haffenden AM, Goodale MA (2000) Independent effects of pictorial displays on perception and action. Vision Res 40:1597–1607CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Haffenden AM, Schiff KC, Goodale MA (2001) The dissociation between perception and action in the Ebbinghaus illusion: non-illusory effects of pictorial cues on grasp. Curr Biol 11:177–181CrossRefPubMed Haffenden AM, Schiff KC, Goodale MA (2001) The dissociation between perception and action in the Ebbinghaus illusion: non-illusory effects of pictorial cues on grasp. Curr Biol 11:177–181CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Hanisch C, Konczak J, Dohle C (2001) The effect of the Ebbinghaus illusion on grasping behaviour of children. Exp Brain Res 137:237–245CrossRefPubMed Hanisch C, Konczak J, Dohle C (2001) The effect of the Ebbinghaus illusion on grasping behaviour of children. Exp Brain Res 137:237–245CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Kuhtz-Buschbeck JP, Stolze H, Johnk K, Boczek-Funcke A, Illert M (1998) Development of prehension movements in children: a kinematic study. Exp Brain Res 122:424–432CrossRefPubMed Kuhtz-Buschbeck JP, Stolze H, Johnk K, Boczek-Funcke A, Illert M (1998) Development of prehension movements in children: a kinematic study. Exp Brain Res 122:424–432CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Milner AD, Goodale MA (1995) The visual brain in action. Oxford University Press, Oxford Milner AD, Goodale MA (1995) The visual brain in action. Oxford University Press, Oxford
go back to reference Pavani F, Boscagli I, Benvenuti F, Rabuffetti M, Farnè A (1999) Are perception and action affected differently by the Titchener circles illusion? Exp Brain Res 127:95–101CrossRefPubMed Pavani F, Boscagli I, Benvenuti F, Rabuffetti M, Farnè A (1999) Are perception and action affected differently by the Titchener circles illusion? Exp Brain Res 127:95–101CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Smeets JBJ, Brenner E (1999) A new view on grasping. Motor Control 3:237–271PubMed Smeets JBJ, Brenner E (1999) A new view on grasping. Motor Control 3:237–271PubMed
go back to reference Smeets JBJ, Brenner E, de Grave DDJ, Cuijpers RH (2002) Illusions in action: consequences of inconsistent processing of spatial attributes. Exp Brain Res 147:135–144CrossRefPubMed Smeets JBJ, Brenner E, de Grave DDJ, Cuijpers RH (2002) Illusions in action: consequences of inconsistent processing of spatial attributes. Exp Brain Res 147:135–144CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Smeets JBJ, Glover S, Brenner E (2003) Modeling the time-dependent effect of the Ebbinghaus illusion on grasping. Spat Vis 16:311–324CrossRefPubMed Smeets JBJ, Glover S, Brenner E (2003) Modeling the time-dependent effect of the Ebbinghaus illusion on grasping. Spat Vis 16:311–324CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Westwood DA, Heath M, Roy EA (2000) The effect of a pictorial illusion on closed-loop and open-loop prehension. Exp Brain Res 134:456–463CrossRefPubMed Westwood DA, Heath M, Roy EA (2000) The effect of a pictorial illusion on closed-loop and open-loop prehension. Exp Brain Res 134:456–463CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Grasp effects of the Ebbinghaus illusion are ambiguous
Authors
R. Gilster
J. P. Kuhtz-Buschbeck
C. D. Wiesner
R. Ferstl
Publication date
01-05-2006
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Experimental Brain Research / Issue 3/2006
Print ISSN: 0014-4819
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1106
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-006-0463-1

Other articles of this Issue 3/2006

Experimental Brain Research 3/2006 Go to the issue