35Th European Conference on Visual Perception Alghero, Italy 2–6 September 2012
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Perception, 2012, volume 41, supplement, page 1 – 269 35th European Conference on Visual Perception Alghero, Italy 2–6 September 2012 Abstracts Sunday Wednesday Symposium: 100 years of good 1 Talks: Attention II 40 Gestalt: new vistas Talks: Adaptation II 42 Symposium: Space, colour, natural 3 Talks: Brightness and lightness 45 vision, and conscious robots: A symposium to honour Talks: Consciousness 47 Tom Troscianko Talks: Mulisensory processing 49 Monday Talks: Contrast 51 Talks: Aftereffects 52 Symposium: A vision for open science 6 Thursday Symposium: Computational 7 approaches to visual illusion Talks: Attention III 55 Tuesday Talks: Models and theory 57 Talks: Art and vision 60 Symposium: Alpha revisited: The role 9 of neural oscillations in visual Talks: EEG and electrophysiology 62 perception and selective attention Talks: Haptics 65 Symposium: Colour cognition 11 Talks: Cognition 67 Wednesday Monday Symposium: Moving image–Moving 13 Posters: 3D perception 70 eyes: Active vision in the real world Posters: Colour perception 84 Symposium: Visual motor and 14 Posters: Illusions 90 attentional aspects of dyslexia Posters: Applied vision 95 Monday Posters: Emotions 103 Talks: 3D perception I 16 Posters: Linking face-spaces for 109 emotion and trait perception Talks: Colour perception 18 Posters: Motion processing 117 Talks: Face processing 20 Talks: Motion processing 22 Tuesday Tuesday Posters: Attention 121 Posters: Biological motion 148 Talks: 3D perception II 25 Posters: Clinical vision 152 Talks: Attention I 27 Posters: Crowding 159 Talks: Eye movements 30 Posters: Encoding and decoding 161 Talks: Crowding 31 Posters: Eye movements 163 Talks: Adaptation I 33 Posters: Learning and memory 172 Talks: Clinical vision 35 Posters: Retina 174 Talks: Biological motion 37 Wednesday Posters: Adaptation 176 Posters: Ageing and development 187 Posters: fMRI 196 Posters: Organization, learning, and 199 action Posters: Aftereffects 205 Posters: Brightness and lightness 205 Posters: Consciousness 208 Posters: Contours and contrast 215 Posters: Multisensory processing 223 Posters: Multistability 225 Posters: Spatial vision 226 Thursday Posters: Art and vision 231 Posters: Cognition 237 Posters: Computer and robot vision 241 Posters: Decision making 242 Posters: EEG and electrophysiology 245 Posters: Haptics 251 Posters: Models and theory 253 Publisher’s note. In the interests of efficiency, these abstracts have been reproduced as supplied by the Conference with little or no copy editing by Pion. Thus, the English and style may not match those of regular Perception articles. Organiser Local organising committee Management Technical staff Baingio Pinna Marco Marongiu Giuseppe Licheri Maria Tanca Chiara Bishop Caterina Camboni Maria Teresa Sotgiu Claudia Satta Cristina Bodano Barbara Panico 5EKGPVKſEEQOOKVVGG Rossana Actis-Grosso, Liliana Albertazzi, Hiroshi Ashida, M Dorothee Augustin, Michael Bach, Benjamin Backus, Stefano Baldassi, Anton Beer, Marco Bertamini, Eli Brenner, Anna Brooks, Isabelle Bülthoff, David Burr, Claus-Christian Carbon, Marisa Carrasco, Clara Casco, Patrick Cavanagh, Frans Cornelissen, Claudio De’ Sperati, Lee De-Wit, Massimiliano Di Luca, Birgitta Dresp-Langley, Casper Erkelens, Andrea Facoetti, Manfred Fahle, Jozsef Fiser, Karl Gegenfurtner, Mark Georgeson, Sergei Gepshtein, Walter Gerbino, Tandra Ghose, Iain Gilchrist, Alan Gilchrist, Barbara Gillam, Enrico Giora, Andrei Gorea, Simone Gori, Mark Greenlee, Sven P Heinrich, Frouke Hermens, Michael Herzog, Glyn Humphreys, Jean-Michel Hupé, Makoto Ichikawa, Astrid M L Kappers, Matthias Keil, Kenneth Knoblauch, Jan Koenderink, Yunfeng Li, Pascal Mamassian, George Mather, Tim Meese, Guenter Meinhardt, David Melcher, Ming Meng, John Mollon, Michael Morgan, Maria Concetta Morrone, Isamu Motoyoshi, Shin’Ya Nishida, Daniel Osorio, Stephen Palmer, Thomas Papathomas, Galina Paramei, Marina Pavlova, Francesca Pei, Baingio Pinna, Uri Polat, Christoph Redies, Caterina Ripamonti, Brian Rogers, Bruno Rossion, Michele Rucci, Dov Sagi, Kenzo Sakurai, Takao Sato, Tadamasa Sawada, Alexander Schlegel, Thomas Schmidt, Yuri Shelepin, Alexander N Sokolov, George Sperling, Natale Stucchi, Petroc Sumner, Maria Tanca, Peter Thompson, Ian M Thornton, David Tolhurst, Peter Tse, Sander Van de Cruys, Peter van der Helm, Andrea Van Doorn, Cees van Leeuwen, Rob Van Lier, Gert van Tonder, Frans A J Verstraten, Nicholas Wade, Johan Wagemans, Katsumi Watanabe, Andrew Watson, Sophie Wuerger, Qasim Zaidi, Johannes Zanker, Daniele Zavagno, Marco Zorzi Sponsors Università degli Studi di Sassari www.uniss.it Pion Ltd www.pion.co.uk Rank Prize Funds www.rankprize.org/ ECVP 2010 ecvp2010.epfl.ch ECVP 2009 ECVP 2008 Dipartimento di Architettura, Design e Urbanistica www.architettura.uniss.it Dipartimento di Scienze Umanistiche e Sociali www.uniss.it/php/lingue.php Fondazione del Banco di Sardegna www.fondazionebancodisardegna.it/ AIP (Associazione Italiana Psicologi) www.asp-psicologia.it/ Exhibitors MIT Press mitpress.mit.edu/main/home/default.asp Kybervision www.kybervision.com/ Pion Ltd www.pion.co.uk/ Tobii www.tobii.com/ Interactive Minds www.interactive-minds.com/ Wiley-Blackwell eu.wiley.com/ Springer www.springer.com SensoMotoric Instruments www.smivision.com/ Oxford University Press global.oup.com/ The European Conference on Visual Perception is an annual event. Previous conferences took place in: 1978 Marburg (D) 1990 Paris (F) 2002 Glasgow (GB) 1979 Noordwijkerrhout (NL) 1991 Vilnius (LT) 2003 Paris (F) 1980 Brighton (GB) 1992 Pisa (I) 2004 Budapest (H) 1981 Gouvieux (F) 1993 Edinburgh (GB) 2005 A Coruña (E) 1982 Leuven (B) 1994 Eindhoven (NL) 2006 St Petersburg (RU) 1983 Lucca (I) 1995 Tübingen (D) 2007 Arezzo (I) 1984 Cambridge (GB) 1996 Strasbourg (F) 2008 Utrecht (NL) 1985 Peñiscola (E) 1997 Helsinki (FI) 2009 Regensburg (D) 1986 Bad Nauheim (D) 1998 Oxford (GB) 2010 Lausanne (CH) 1987 Varna (BG) 1999 Trieste (I) 2011 Toulouse (F) 1988 Bristol (GB) 2000 Groningen (NL) 1989 Zichron Yaakov (IL) 2001 Kuşadası (TR) © 2012 a Pion publication Symposium: 100 years of good Gestalt: new vistas 1 Sunday ECVP 2012 Abstracts Sunday SYMPOSIUM: 100 YEARS OF GOOD GESTALT: NEW VISTAS ◆ How good Gestalt determines low level vision M Herzog (EPFL, Switzerland; e-mail: michael.herzog@epfl.ch) In classical models of vision, low level visual tasks are explained by low level neural mechanisms. For example, in crowding, perception of a target is impeded by nearby elements because, as it is argued, responses of neurons coding for nearby elements are pooled. Indeed, performance deteriorated when a vernier stimulus was flanked by two lines, one on each side. However, performance improved strongly when the lines were embedded in squares. Low level interactions cannot explain this uncrowding effect because the neighboring lines are part of the squares. It seems that good Gestalts determine crowding, contrary to classical models which rather predict that low level crowding should occur even before the squares, ie higher level features, are computed. Crowding and other types of contextual modulation are just one example. Very similar results were also found for visual backward and forward masking, feature integration along motion trajectories and many more. I will discuss how good Gestalts determine low level processing by recurrent, dynamic computations, thus, mapping the physical into perceptual space. ◆ A century of Gestalt theory: The good, the bad, and the ugly J Wagemans (University of Leuven [KU Leuven], Belgium; e-mail: [email protected]) 100 years ago Wertheimer published his paper on phi motion, widely recognized as the start of Gestalt theory. I will evaluate what it has offered to modern vision science. (1) The good: The emergence of structure in perceptual experience and the subjective nature of phenomenal awareness remained central topics of research. Using methods and tools that were not at the Gestaltists’ disposal, much progress was made in outlining principles of perceptual grouping and figure-ground organization. (2) The bad: Gestalt theory was criticized for offering mere demonstrations with simple or confounded stimuli, and formulating laws with little precision for every factor that influenced perceptual organization. Köhler’s electrical field theory was proven wrong and the underlying notion of psychophysical isomorphism not productive. Claims about Gestalt principles being preattentive, innate, and independent of experience appeared exaggerated. (3) The ugly: Several Gestalt notions do not fit well with the rest of what we know about vision. How can we understand the relationships between parts and wholes in light of the visual cortical hierarchy and dynamics? How can internal laws based on a general minimum principle yield veridicality in the external world? Establishing an integration of Gestalt theory within modern vision science provides serious challenges. ◆ Understanding perceptual organization: What, how, and why? S Palmer (University of California, Berkeley, USA; e-mail: [email protected]) Koffka famously asked why things look the way they do. I will argue that answering it entails answering at least two important additional questions: what things look like and how they come to look that way. Gestalt psychologists answered the what-question by producing and discussing phenomenological demonstrations of geometrical image features (eg, proximity and similarity of elements in grouping and surroundedness and small size of regions in figure/ground perception), the how-question by hypothesizing