No abstract

Although it has long been apparent that observers tend to overestimate the magnitude of acute angles and underestimate obtuse ones, there is no consensus about why such distortions are seen. Geometrical modeling combined with psychophysical testing of human subjects indicates that these misperceptions are the result of an empirical strategy that resolves the inherent ambiguity of angular stimuli by generating percepts of the past significance of the stimulus rather than the geometry of its retinal projection.T he fact that the subtense of any acute angle is seen as being somewhat larger than the measured angle of the stimulus, whereas the subtense of any obtuse angle is seen as being somewhat smaller, was first reported by Wundt (1) and subsequently by both Hering (2) and Helmholtz (3), all of whom surmised that these distortions might underlie some of the classical geometrical illusions (4). These 19th century investigations were, however, descriptive rather than experimental, and the interpretations, speculative. Despite numerous modern studies (5-15), the phenomenon of angle misperception has never been explained.Here we provide evidence that the systematic misperception of angle subtense is the consequence of a radically empirical strategy of perception in which the angle seen is determined by the relative frequency of the possible sources of angle projections that observers have experienced. The biological rationale for this strategy is a solution to the problem posed by the inevitable ambiguity of angular stimuli. The inability of an angle projected onto a plane to specify uniquely the source is illustrated in Fig. 1. Indeed, because space is divisible without limit, the number of possible real-world sources underlying a given retinal projection is infinite.Because the well being of an observer depends on appropriate interactions with the sources of visual stimuli, the ambiguity of retinal images has long been regarded as a central problem in vision (16). Recent studies of simultaneous brightness contrast (17,18), Mach bands (19,20),, and the perception of color (22) have all suggested that this dilemma is solved by an empirical strategy in which retinal activation triggers associations (percepts) determined by the relative frequencies of the possible sources of the stimulus in past experience. A limitation in validating this concept of vision has been the practical difficulty of quantifying the frequency distribution of the real-world sources underlying the various categories of visual experience. (This problem has also been an obstacle to psychologists who have sought to model perception in terms of Bayes' decision theorem; see ref. 23 for a recent review.) Examining the perception of oriented lines circumvents this obstacle in that the frequency distribution of the possible sources of a given retinal projection-for example, the subtense of the typical source of a given angle projected on the retina-can be computed by geometrical principles, thus providing a more concrete basis for predicting perceptual...

No abstract

No abstract

Abstract& Four different colors are needed to make maps that avoid adjacent countries of the same color. Because the retinal image is two dimensional, like a map, four dimensions of chromatic experience would also be needed to optimally distinguish regions returning spectrally different light to the eye. We