
doi: 10.1068/p7632
pmid: 25109006
Upright hollow human faces produce among the strongest depth-inversion illusions (DIIs), but why? We considered the role of depth undulations by comparing four types of hollow objects: An ellipsoid, a human mask, and two symmetric ‘Martian’ masks, which wavered in depth like the human mask but which lacked face-like features. Illusion strength was quantified either as the critical viewing distance at which the 3-D percept switched between convex and concave (experiment 1) or as the proportion of time (‘predominance’) that observers experienced DII from a fixed intermediate viewing distance (experiment 2). Critical distances were smallest—and hence the illusion was strongest—for the upright human mask; the remaining objects produced undifferentiated critical distance values. The predominance results were more fine-grained: illusions were experienced most often for the upright human mask, least often for the hollow ellipsoid, and to an intermediate extent for the Martian and upside-down human masks. These results suggest: (1) an upside-down human mask and a surface with nonface features undulating in depth are equivalent for the purposes of generating DIIs; (2) depth undulations contribute to DII; and (3) such undulations are most effective when structured into an upright human face.
Male, Depth Perception, Adolescent, Optical Illusions, Distance Perception, Young Adult, Discrimination, Psychological, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Face, Orientation, Psychophysics, Humans, Female
Male, Depth Perception, Adolescent, Optical Illusions, Distance Perception, Young Adult, Discrimination, Psychological, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Face, Orientation, Psychophysics, Humans, Female
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
