Depth Plane Separation Affects Both Lightness Contrast and Assimilation

Lightness contrast & assimilation: testing the hypotheses

Lightness contrast alters lightness of a target decreasing its similarity with neighbouring surfaces (inducers), while lightness assimilation has an opposite effect, similarity is increased. Previous studies emphasized some aspects of stimulation that favour occurrence of one or both of these two phenomena: spatial frequency of the inducers, magnitude and direction of the reflectance difference between the target and the inducers. More importantly, based on previous studies three precise hypotheses can be formulated that predict occurrence of the two phenomena: spatial frequency, differential stimulation and assimilation asymmetry. We manipulated target and inducers’ reflectance, and inducers’ spatial frequency. This enabled us not only to test the importance of these factors, but to predict lightness for each stimulus, according to all three hypotheses. Our results confirmed the importance of tested factors for both lightness contrast and assimilation. Unfortunately, the proposed hypotheses were poor in predicting the obtained data. Differential stimulation hypothesis correctly predicted obtained effect in less than half situations, since small reflectance differences produced contrast, and large differences produced assimilation. Spatial frequency hypothesis did not correctly predict the strength of obtained effects, and we obtained largest assimilation effects with low spatial frequency inducers. Finally, assimilation asymmetry hypothesis did not predict a single obtained effect. Contrary to this hypothesis predictions, we obtained contrast with decrement, and assimilation with increment inducers.

Behavioural and electrophysiological correlates of lightness contrast and assimilation

Lightness contrast and assimilation are opposite phenomena: in contrast grey targets appear darker when bordering bright rather than dark surfaces; in assimilation grey targets appear lighter when bordering bright rather than dark surfaces. The underlying neurophysiological mechanisms of these phenomena are not known. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between contrast and assimilation, and the timing and levels of perceptual and cognitive processing using combined behavioural and electrophysiological methods. Thirty undergraduate students (23 female, age range 18–48 years) participated in a forced-choice (grey target is lighter/darker than a comparison square) task, using stimuli designed such that the inducers were in two configurations (small and large) and two shades (white and black). The behavioural data (more consistent and faster responses) corroborated previous findings of stronger contrast effects with white inducers and stronger assimilation effects with black inducers. According to the Event-Related Potentials (ERP) results the mean amplitude was larger in conditions with less consistent and slower behavioural responses. Thus, with contrast responses P1 amplitude was larger with black than white inducers, and N1 amplitude was larger to assimilation than contrast when the configuration of the stimulus was held constant. These results suggest contrast may occur as early as P1 (~ 110 ms) and assimilation may occur later in N2 (~ 220 ms), whereas in some conditions, differences in ERPs associated with contrast vs assimilation may happen as early as in N1 (~ 170 m), in occipital and parietal cortical sites.