Upload
phamliem
View
213
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Eros, Thanatos and scene-‐based theories of Müller-‐Lyer and Poggendorff illusions
Alexander W. Pressey Winnipeg, Canada
Abstract A distinction between analytic approaches employed by scene-‐based theories of geometric illusions and by scene-‐based investigations of “ subliminal” advertising is sought. Proponents of scene-‐based theories of geometric illusions (e.g., Gillam, 1971; Gregory, 1963; Redding and Vinson, 2010) often provide a picture or a drawing of a 3-‐D object such as the building shown in Figure 1A. They then trace out features of the building to show how they represent a 2-‐D geometric illusion. In the case of Figure 1A, the interior and exterior corners are considered to be 3-‐D versions of expansion and shrinkage forms of 2-‐D Müller–Lyer’s drawings. Figure 1B depicts a “…Poggendorff pattern [bold lines]…with pictorial scenes within which a viewer might subconsciously embed those patterns (thin lines)” (Parks, 2009, p. 142).
Figure 1(A) Representations of 3-‐D objects within which 2-‐D Müller-‐Lyer figures are sketched (Adapted with permission from Schloss & Prinzmetal, 2012; original by Preeti Talwai) (B) Reproduced from Parks, 2009; see text for explanation) Proponents of the theory that corporations employ representations of Freud’s two basic instincts, i.e., sex and aggression, in subliminal advertising provide pictures such as those shown in Figures 2A and 2B. In 2A, the word “SEX” is carefully sketched out in the palm trees and in 2B the skull in the ice cube is circled.
A B
2
A B
Figure 2. Highlighted symbols for Eros and Thanatos in advertisements (Permission to reproduce is currently being sought) 1
Question. Scientifically speaking, exactly how does the operation that is carried out in Figure 1 differ from the operation that is carried out in Figure 2?
References and Notes Gillam, B. (1971). A depth processing theory of the Poggendorff illusion. Perception & Psychophysics, 10, 211-‐216. Gregory, R. L. (1963). Distortion of visual space as inappropriate constancy scaling. Nature, 199, 678-‐680. Parks, T.E. (2009). Demystifying the Poggendorff. Perception, 38, 142-‐144. Redding, G.M., & Vinson, D. W. (2010). Virtual and drawing structures for the Müller-‐ Lyer illusions. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 72, 1350-‐1366. Schloss, K. B., & Prinzmetal, W. (2012). Challenging the inappropriate constancy-‐ scaling account of the Müller-‐Lyer illusion. Psychonomic Society, poster presentration. 1 http://www.sampsoncc.edu/staff/pwolf/sub/subliminals.htm Pressey’s Pieces www.awpressey.com July 2013