The Stream/Bounce Effect Occurs for Luminance- and Disparity-Defined Motion Targets

The Relationship Between Illusory Crescents and the Stream/Bounce Effect

We conducted two experiments to evaluate Meyerhoff and Scholl's (2018, Cognition 170, 88-94) hypothesis that illusory crescents contribute to resolutions in audiovisual stream/bounce displays. In Experiment 1, we measured illusory crescent size in the launching effect as a function of speed, overlap, and sound. In Experiment 2, we tabulated stream and bounce responses to similar stimuli with the same speed, sound, and overlap conditions as Experiment 1. Our critical manipulation of target speed spanned the range of values from typical stream/bounce investigations of ∼5 degrees/s up to the target speeds employed by Meyerhoff and Scholl ∼38 degrees/s. We replicated Meyerhoff and Scholl's findings at higher speeds, but not at slower speeds. Critically, we found that speed influenced crescent size judgements and bouncing responses in opposite directions. As target speed increased, illusory crescent size increased (Experiment 1), but the overall percentage of bounce responses decreased (Experiment 2). Additionally, we found that sound failed to enhance illusory crescent size at slower speeds but promotes bouncing responses at all speeds. The disassociation of the effects of speed and sound on illusory crescents with those effects on reported streaming/bouncing in similar displays provides compelling evidence against Meyerhoff and Scholl's hypothesis. Therefore, we conclude that illusory crescents do not account for the pattern of responses attributed to the stream/bounce effect.

The Effect of Transient Location on the Resolution of Bistable Visual and Audiovisual Motion Sequences

We examined the attention and inference accounts of audiovisual perception using the stream/bounce display, a visual stimulus wherein two identical objects move toward each other, completely superimpose, then move apart. This display has two candidate percepts: stream past each other or bounce off each other. Presented without additional visual or auditory transients, the motion sequence tends to yield the streaming percept, but when coupled with a tone or flash at the point of coincidence, the response bias flips toward bouncing. We explored two competing accounts of this effect: the attentional hypothesis and the inference hypothesis. Participants watched a series of motion sequences where a transient, when present, occurred at the moment of coincidence either colocalised with the motion sequence (congruent presentation) or on the opposite side of the display (incongruent presentation). Assuming the spotlight or zoom lens metaphor, an attentional account predicts that incongruent presentations should be associated with a higher percentage of bouncing responses than congruent presentations, while the inferential account predicts the opposite effect. No effect was found for tone-only trials. However, in trials containing a visual transient, results showed higher proportions of bounce responses within congruent over incongruent presentations, favouring the inference hypothesis over a spotlight or zoom lens attentional account.

Tactile stimulation disambiguates the perception of visual motion paths

Although visual perception traditionally has been considered to be impenetrable by non-visual information, there are a rising number of reports discussing cross-modal influences on visual perception. In two experiments, we investigated how coinciding vibrotactile stimulation affects the perception of two discs that move toward each other, superimpose in the center of the screen, and then move apart. Whereas two discs streaming past each other was the dominant impression when the visual event was presented in isolation, a brief coinciding vibrotactile stimulation at the moment of overlap biased the visual impression toward two discs bouncing off each other (Experiment 1). Further, the vibrotactile stimulation actually changed perceptual processing by reducing the amount of perceived overlap between the discs (Experiment 2), which has been demonstrated to be associated with a higher proportion of bouncing impressions. We propose that tactile-induced quantitative changes in the visual percept might alter the quality of the visual percept (from streaming to bouncing), thereby adding to the understanding of how cross-modal information interacts with early visual perception and how this interaction influences subsequent visual impressions.

Disambiguating the Stream/Bounce Illusion With Inference

The ‘stream/bounce’ illusion refers to the perception of an ambiguous visual display in which two discs approach each other on a collision course. The display can be seen as two discs streaming through each other or bouncing off each other. Which perception dominates, may be influenced by a brief transient, usually a sound, presented around the time of simulated contact. Several theories have been proposed to account for the switching in dominance based on sensory processing, attention and cognitive inference, but a universally applicable, parsimonious explanation has not emerged. We hypothesized that only cognitive inference would be influenced by the perceptual history of the display. We rendered the display technically unambiguous by vertically offsetting the targets’ trajectories and manipulated their history by allowing the objects to switch from one trajectory to the other up to four times before the potential collision point. As the number of switches increased, the number of ‘bounce’ responses also increased. These observations show that expectancy is a critical factor in determining whether a bounce or streaming is perceived and may form the basis for a universal explanation of instances of the stream/bounce illusion.