Ashley Nixon 6829934
LAB 7 (CHAPTER 10): OBJECT PERCEPTION
Part 1: Qualitative Observation of a Multistable Figure
Initial Observations: As a first step, take a look at the figure on the preceding page.
Just look at it for a minute or two and record what you see (use objective, scientific language and
include technical terms you’ve learned):
 Black circles with white arrows or peace signs within them.
 The contrast of white and black creates the illusion of a cube and depth (3dimentional).
 The white 3D cube seems to be in front of black circles.
Further Observations
1. How many different three-dimensional interpretations of the figure did you see?
-I could see three different three-dimensional illusions. These interpretations
consisted of the white cube in front of the black circles; the two other ones were the
direction of the cube, either facing upwards or downwards.
2. If you saw multiple interpretations, did your perception of them shift back and
forth on its own? Could you make it shift? Were there any tricks you used to make
it shift?
-My perception of these different interpretations did not shift on its own; however I
could make them change. In order to do so, I had to look away then look again, but
focus on a different part of the image or, look to the corner of the image and adjust
my eyes (accommodation).
3. The lines that connect the corners of the cube aren’t actually drawn, but one
perceives them. How strong was your impression of the lines? Did you feel like you
could actually “see” them, or was there merely a “sense that they were there”? Did
the strength of the perception vary depending on whether you saw the cube floating
out front vs. behind?
-My impression of these lines was very strong depending on the cube variation. In
other words, if the cube was seen as in front of the black circles, I could strongly
perceive these imaginary lines. In contrast, if the cube was behind the black circles,
I only had the sense that they were there but I could not really see them since they
would be “hidden” by the white area or wall of the image.
4. Please note here any other observation(s) you might have had about the stimulus:
-The most consistent variation of the cube was when it was in front the black circles
and the cube was facing downwards. Every time I would look at the image, this
would be the one I would see unless I changed the shape of my eye and really tried
to see the other variations.
5. Did your observations change after you read the background material above?
How? Why?
-Yes, my observations did change. At first, I could only see one cube, and with more
observation I interpreted the two possible directions; however I did not see the cube
behind the black circles until I read the information and read questions 3.
Ashley Nixon 6829934
Ashley Nixon 6829934
2. How easy or hard was it to break the two objects down into geons? Did this differ
between the two objects? Why?
-It was very easy since they were simple objects. Easiness did not differ between
both my objects. This being said, it might have been harder if my objects were much
more complex and had more ambiguous shapes. In addition, it is possible that it is
due to the fact, according to Biederman, that there are only 36 basic geons that
make up all objects in our environment.
3. Do you think the two objects could be differentiated based on their geon
structural description? Could they be recognized from the geons alone? Why or
why not?
-I believe that these two objects could be differentiated based on their geons since
they did not have the same geons; however, they could not be recognized from their
geons alone. Even though they have a particular combination of the possible 36
basic geons, this same combination could be used to describe another object since so
many combinations of these geons are possible. In addition, the recognition of the
object could be biased by perception, in other words, the person looking at these
geons could have been primed by looking at a pen which has the same geons as the
candle. Therefore, this person would recognize these geons as a pen instead of a
candle.
4. Based on their geons alone, would the two objects both be recognizable from
various angles?
-Geons can be recognized from different angles due to past experiences with shapes
stored in memory; however, the objects themselves would not necessarily be easily
recognized for the same reasons stated in question 3.
5. Based on your observations here, and your personal experience with object
recognition, what are your thoughts about Biederman’s geon structural description
model?
-Based on my artistic experience, geons are often used when sketching an object or
scene. In other words, it is much easier to reconstruct an object/ scene if the basic
shapes (geons) are deciphered first. This being said, it is possible that the eye does
the same thing when recreating a scene or object which is separate the object/scene
into simple shapes and then later create a 3-D representation based on these simple
geometric shapes.