ArticlePerception2023
Effects of cortical distance on the Ebbinghaus and Delboeuf illusions.
Article in Perception, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Ebbinghaus Illusion Distortions in Amblyopia: Impairments of Visual Size Processing and Interocular Integration.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025Article
- Functional correlates of atypical visuoperceptual organization in a multisite clinical high-risk sample.Journal of psychopathology and clinical science · 2025Article
- Distinct Contributions of Alpha and Beta Oscillations to Context-Dependent Visual Size Perception.Neuroscience bulletin · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Ebbinghaus and Delboeuf illusions affect the perceived size of a target circle depending on the size and proximity of circular inducers or a ring. Converging evidence suggests that these illusions are driven by interactions between contours mediated by their cortical distance in primary visual cortex. We tested the effect of cortical distance on these illusions using two methods: First, we manipulated retinal distance between target and inducers in a two-interval forced choice design, finding that targets appeared larger with a closer surround. Next, we predicted that targets presented peripherally should appear larger due to cortical magnification. Hence, we tested the illusion strength when positioning the stimuli at various eccentricities, with results supporting this hypothesis. We calculated estimated cortical distances between illusion elements in each experiment and used these estimates to compare the relationship between cortical distance and illusion strength across our experiments. In a final experiment, we modified the Delboeuf illusion to test whether the influence of the inducers/annuli in this illusion is influenced by an inhibitory surround. We found evidence that an additional outer ring makes targets appear smaller compared to a single-ring condition, suggesting that near and distal contours have antagonistic effects on perceived target size.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.