The Honeycomb illusion: Uniform textures not perceived as such

The Role of Uniform Textures in Making Texture Elements Visible in the Visual Periphery

There are important differences between central and peripheral vision. With respect to shape, contours retain phenomenal sharpness, although some contours disappear if they are near other contours. This leads to some uniform textures to appear non-uniform (Honeycomb illusion, Bertamini et al., 2016). Unlike other phenomena of shape perception in the periphery, this illusion is showing how continuity of the texture does not contribute to phenomenal continuity. We systematically varied the relationship between central and peripheral regions, and we collected subjective reports (how far can one see lines) as well as judgments of line orientation. We used extended textures created with a square grid and some additional lines that are invisible when they are located at the corners of the grid, or visible when they are separated from the grid (control condition). With respects to subjective reports, we compared the region of visibility for cases in which the texture was uniform (Exp 1a), or when in a central region the lines were different (Exp 1b). There were no differences, showing no role of objective uniformity on visibility. Next, in addition to the region of visibility we measured sensitivity using a forced-choice task (line tilted left or right) (Exp 2). The drop in sensitivity with eccentricity matched the size of the region in which lines were perceived in the illusion condition, but not in the control condition. When participants were offered a choice to report of the lines were present or absent (Exp 3) they confirmed that they did not see them in the illusion condition, but saw them in the control condition. We conclude that mechanisms that control perception of contours operate differently in the periphery, and override prior expectations, including that of uniformity. Conversely, when elements are detected in the periphery, we assign to them properties based on information from central vision, but these shapes cannot be identified correctly when the task requires such discrimination.

Peripheral vision is mainly for looking rather than seeing

Vision includes looking and seeing. Looking, mainly via gaze shifts, selects a fraction of visual input information for passage through the brain's information bottleneck. The selected input is placed within the attentional spotlight, typically in the central visual field. Seeing decodes, i.e., recognizes and discriminates, the selected inputs. Hence, peripheral vision should be mainly devoted to looking, in particular, deciding where to shift the gaze. Looking is often guided exogenously by a saliency map created by the primary visual cortex (V1), and can be effective with no seeing and limited awareness. In seeing, peripheral vision not only suffers from poor spatial resolution, but is also subject to crowding and is more vulnerable to illusions by misleading, ambiguous, and impoverished visual inputs. Central vision, mainly for seeing, enjoys the top-down feedback that aids seeing in light of the bottleneck which is hypothesized to starts from V1 to higher areas. This feedback queries for additional information from lower visual cortical areas such as V1 for ongoing recognition. Peripheral vision is deficient in this feedback according to the Central-peripheral Dichotomy (CPD) theory. The saccades engendered by peripheral vision allows looking to combine with seeing to give human observers the impression of seeing the whole scene clearly despite inattentional blindness.

A bias in saccadic suppression of shape change

Processing of visual information in the central (foveal) and peripheral visual field is vastly different. To achieve a homogeneous representation of the visual world across eye movements, the visual system needs to compensate for these differences. By introducing subtle changes between peripheral and foveal inputs across saccades, one can test this compensation. We morphed shapes between a triangle and a circle and presented two different change directions (circularity decrease or increase) at varying magnitudes across a saccade. In a change-discrimination task, observers disproportionally often reported percepts of circularity increase. To test the relationship with visual-field differences, we measured perception when shapes were exclusively presented either in the periphery (before a saccade), or in the fovea (after a saccade). We found that overall shapes were perceived as more circular before than after a saccade and the more pronounced this difference was for a participant, the smaller was their circularity-increase bias in the change-discrimination task. We propose that visual-field differences have a direct and an indirect influence on transsaccadic perception of shape change. The direct influence is based on the distinct appearance of shape in the central and peripheral visual field in a trial, causing an increase of the perceptual magnitude of circularity-decrease changes. The indirect influence is based on long-term build-up of transsaccadic expectations; if a change is opposite (circularity increase) to the expectation (circularity decrease), it should elicit a strong error signal facilitating change detection. We discuss the concept of transsaccadic expectations and theoretical implications for transsaccadic perception of other feature changes.

How do visual skills relate to action video game performance?

It has been claimed that video gamers possess increased perceptual and cognitive skills compared to non-video gamers. Here, we examined to which extent gaming performance in CS:GO (Counter-Strike: Global Offensive) correlates with visual performance. We tested 94 players ranging from beginners to experts with a battery of visual paradigms, such as visual acuity and contrast detection. In addition, we assessed performance in specific gaming skills, such as shooting and tracking, and administered personality traits. All measures together explained about 70% of the variance of the players’ rank. In particular, regression models showed that a few visual abilities, such as visual acuity in the periphery and the susceptibility to the Honeycomb illusion, were strongly associated with the players’ rank. Although the causality of the effect remains unknown, our results show that high-rank players perform better in certain visual skills compared to low-rank players.

A review of interactions between peripheral and foveal vision

Visual processing varies dramatically across the visual field. These differences start in the retina and continue all the way to the visual cortex. Despite these differences in processing, the perceptual experience of humans is remarkably stable and continuous across the visual field. Research in the last decade has shown that processing in peripheral and foveal vision is not independent, but is more directly connected than previously thought. We address three core questions on how peripheral and foveal vision interact, and review recent findings on potentially related phenomena that could provide answers to these questions. First, how is the processing of peripheral and foveal signals related during fixation? Peripheral signals seem to be processed in foveal retinotopic areas to facilitate peripheral object recognition, and foveal information seems to be extrapolated toward the periphery to generate a homogeneous representation of the environment. Second, how are peripheral and foveal signals re-calibrated? Transsaccadic changes in object features lead to a reduction in the discrepancy between peripheral and foveal appearance. Third, how is peripheral and foveal information stitched together across saccades? Peripheral and foveal signals are integrated across saccadic eye movements to average percepts and to reduce uncertainty. Together, these findings illustrate that peripheral and foveal processing are closely connected, mastering the compromise between a large peripheral visual field and high resolution at the fovea.

Spatial dynamics of the eggs illusion: Visual field anisotropy and peripheral vision

The eggs illusion is a visual phenomenon in which bright circular patches located at the midpoints between the intersections of a dark grid are perceived as being elongated along the direction orthogonal to the grid line. In the four experiments we report here, we explored the spatial properties of the eggs illusion by manipulating retinal eccentricity and the location of the stimulus in the visual field. In Experiment 1, we examined whether central and peripheral configurations affected the illusory magnitude. In Experiment 2, we varied the spatial location of grid patterns and found that the eggs illusion was intensified when the pattern was presented in the horizontal, not vertical or diagonal position, relative to the fixation. In Experiment 3, we varied the retinal eccentricity of the pattern along the horizontal meridian and found that the illusion was enhanced in the retinal periphery. In Experiment 4, we manipulated the size of the stimulus and found that peripheral enhancement of the eggs illusion was more apparent for a larger pattern. The visual field anisotropy and the peripheral enhancement of the eggs illusion are discussed in relation to mechanisms underlying grid-induced illusions.

Exploring the Extent in the Visual Field of the Honeycomb and Extinction Illusions

There are situations in which what is perceived in central vision is different to what is perceived in the periphery, even though the stimulus display is uniform. Here, we studied two cases, known as the Extinction illusion and the Honeycomb illusion, involving small disks and lines, respectively, presented over a large extent of the visual field. Disks and lines are visible in the periphery on their own, but they become invisible when they are presented as part of a pattern (grid). Observers (N = 56) adjusted a circular probe to report the size of the region in which they had seen the lines or the disks. Different images had black or white lines/disks, and we included control stimuli in which these features were spatially separated from the regular grid of squares. We confirmed that the illusion was experienced by the majority of observers and is dependent on the interaction between the elements (i.e., the lines/disks have to be near the squares). We found a dissociation between the two illusions in the dependence on contrast polarity suggesting different mechanisms. We analysed the variability between individuals with respect to schizotypical and autistic-spectrum traits (short version of the Oxford-Liverpool Inventory of Feelings and Experiences [O-LIFE] questionnaire and the Autistic Quotient, respectively) but found no significant relationships. We discuss how illusions relative to what observers are aware of in the periphery may offer a unique tool to study visual awareness.