Spatial filtering versus anchoring accounts of brightness/lightness perception in staircase and simultaneous brightness/lightness contrast stimuli

Barbara Blakeslee, Daniel Reetz, Mark E. McCourt

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

J. Cataliotti and A. Gilchrist (1995) reported that, consistent with anchoring theory, the lightness of a black step in a reflectance staircase was not altered by moving a white step from a remote to an adjacent location. Recently, E. Economou, S. Zdravkovic, and A. Gilchrist (2007) reported data supporting three additional predictions of the anchoring model (A. Gilchrist et al., 1999): 1) equiluminant incremental targets in staircase simultaneous lightness contrast stimuli appeared equally light; 2) the simultaneous lightness contrast effect was due mainly to the lightening of the target on the black surround; and 3) the strength of lightness induction was greatest for darker targets. We investigated similar stimuli using brightness/lightness matching and found, contrary to these reports, that: 1) the relative position of the steps in a luminance staircase significantly influenced their brightness/lightness; 2) equiluminant incremental targets in staircase simultaneous brightness/lightness contrast stimuli did not all appear equally bright/light; 3) an asymmetry due to a greater brightening/ lightening of the target on the black surround was not general; and 4) darker targets produced larger effects only when plotted on a log scale. In addition, the ODOG model (B. Blakeslee & M. E. McCourt, 1999) did an excellent job of accounting for brightness/ lightness matching in these stimuli.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number22
JournalJournal of vision
Volume9
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 26 2009

Fingerprint

Light

Keywords

  • Computational modeling
  • Lightness/brightness perception
  • Spatial vision

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology
  • Sensory Systems

Cite this

Spatial filtering versus anchoring accounts of brightness/lightness perception in staircase and simultaneous brightness/lightness contrast stimuli. / Blakeslee, Barbara; Reetz, Daniel; McCourt, Mark E.

In: Journal of vision, Vol. 9, No. 3, 22, 26.03.2009.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ce95dc7ba06642eca82fb3d947a95c56,
title = "Spatial filtering versus anchoring accounts of brightness/lightness perception in staircase and simultaneous brightness/lightness contrast stimuli",
abstract = "J. Cataliotti and A. Gilchrist (1995) reported that, consistent with anchoring theory, the lightness of a black step in a reflectance staircase was not altered by moving a white step from a remote to an adjacent location. Recently, E. Economou, S. Zdravkovic, and A. Gilchrist (2007) reported data supporting three additional predictions of the anchoring model (A. Gilchrist et al., 1999): 1) equiluminant incremental targets in staircase simultaneous lightness contrast stimuli appeared equally light; 2) the simultaneous lightness contrast effect was due mainly to the lightening of the target on the black surround; and 3) the strength of lightness induction was greatest for darker targets. We investigated similar stimuli using brightness/lightness matching and found, contrary to these reports, that: 1) the relative position of the steps in a luminance staircase significantly influenced their brightness/lightness; 2) equiluminant incremental targets in staircase simultaneous brightness/lightness contrast stimuli did not all appear equally bright/light; 3) an asymmetry due to a greater brightening/ lightening of the target on the black surround was not general; and 4) darker targets produced larger effects only when plotted on a log scale. In addition, the ODOG model (B. Blakeslee & M. E. McCourt, 1999) did an excellent job of accounting for brightness/ lightness matching in these stimuli.",
keywords = "Computational modeling, Lightness/brightness perception, Spatial vision",
author = "Barbara Blakeslee and Daniel Reetz and McCourt, {Mark E.}",
year = "2009",
month = "3",
day = "26",
doi = "10.1167/9.3.22",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "9",
journal = "Journal of Vision",
issn = "1534-7362",
publisher = "Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Spatial filtering versus anchoring accounts of brightness/lightness perception in staircase and simultaneous brightness/lightness contrast stimuli

AU - Blakeslee, Barbara

AU - Reetz, Daniel

AU - McCourt, Mark E.

PY - 2009/3/26

Y1 - 2009/3/26

N2 - J. Cataliotti and A. Gilchrist (1995) reported that, consistent with anchoring theory, the lightness of a black step in a reflectance staircase was not altered by moving a white step from a remote to an adjacent location. Recently, E. Economou, S. Zdravkovic, and A. Gilchrist (2007) reported data supporting three additional predictions of the anchoring model (A. Gilchrist et al., 1999): 1) equiluminant incremental targets in staircase simultaneous lightness contrast stimuli appeared equally light; 2) the simultaneous lightness contrast effect was due mainly to the lightening of the target on the black surround; and 3) the strength of lightness induction was greatest for darker targets. We investigated similar stimuli using brightness/lightness matching and found, contrary to these reports, that: 1) the relative position of the steps in a luminance staircase significantly influenced their brightness/lightness; 2) equiluminant incremental targets in staircase simultaneous brightness/lightness contrast stimuli did not all appear equally bright/light; 3) an asymmetry due to a greater brightening/ lightening of the target on the black surround was not general; and 4) darker targets produced larger effects only when plotted on a log scale. In addition, the ODOG model (B. Blakeslee & M. E. McCourt, 1999) did an excellent job of accounting for brightness/ lightness matching in these stimuli.

AB - J. Cataliotti and A. Gilchrist (1995) reported that, consistent with anchoring theory, the lightness of a black step in a reflectance staircase was not altered by moving a white step from a remote to an adjacent location. Recently, E. Economou, S. Zdravkovic, and A. Gilchrist (2007) reported data supporting three additional predictions of the anchoring model (A. Gilchrist et al., 1999): 1) equiluminant incremental targets in staircase simultaneous lightness contrast stimuli appeared equally light; 2) the simultaneous lightness contrast effect was due mainly to the lightening of the target on the black surround; and 3) the strength of lightness induction was greatest for darker targets. We investigated similar stimuli using brightness/lightness matching and found, contrary to these reports, that: 1) the relative position of the steps in a luminance staircase significantly influenced their brightness/lightness; 2) equiluminant incremental targets in staircase simultaneous brightness/lightness contrast stimuli did not all appear equally bright/light; 3) an asymmetry due to a greater brightening/ lightening of the target on the black surround was not general; and 4) darker targets produced larger effects only when plotted on a log scale. In addition, the ODOG model (B. Blakeslee & M. E. McCourt, 1999) did an excellent job of accounting for brightness/ lightness matching in these stimuli.

KW - Computational modeling

KW - Lightness/brightness perception

KW - Spatial vision

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=64549161512&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=64549161512&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1167/9.3.22

DO - 10.1167/9.3.22

M3 - Article

C2 - 19757961

AN - SCOPUS:64549161512

VL - 9

JO - Journal of Vision

JF - Journal of Vision

SN - 1534-7362

IS - 3

M1 - 22

ER -