Article

A Century of Gestalt Psychology in Visual Perception: I. Perceptual Grouping and Figure-Ground Organization

Laboratory of Experimental Psychology, University of Leuven (KU Leuven).
Psychological Bulletin (Impact Factor: 14.39). 07/2012; 138(6):1172-217. DOI: 10.1037/a0029333
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT In 1912, Max Wertheimer published his paper on phi motion, widely recognized as the start of Gestalt psychology. Because of its continued relevance in modern psychology, this centennial anniversary is an excellent opportunity to take stock of what Gestalt psychology has offered and how it has changed since its inception. We first introduce the key findings and ideas in the Berlin school of Gestalt psychology, and then briefly sketch its development, rise, and fall. Next, we discuss its empirical and conceptual problems, and indicate how they are addressed in contemporary research on perceptual grouping and figure-ground organization. In particular, we review the principles of grouping, both classical (e.g., proximity, similarity, common fate, good continuation, closure, symmetry, parallelism) and new (e.g., synchrony, common region, element and uniform connectedness), and their role in contour integration and completion. We then review classic and new image-based principles of figure-ground organization, how it is influenced by past experience and attention, and how it relates to shape and depth perception. After an integrated review of the neural mechanisms involved in contour grouping, border ownership, and figure-ground perception, we conclude by evaluating what modern vision science has offered compared to traditional Gestalt psychology, whether we can speak of a Gestalt revival, and where the remaining limitations and challenges lie. A better integration of this research tradition with the rest of vision science requires further progress regarding the conceptual and theoretical foundations of the Gestalt approach, which is the focus of a second review article. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved).

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Michael Kubovy, Jul 05, 2015
4 Followers
 · 
291 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In a recent functional magnetic resonance imaging study, Kok and de Lange (2014) observed that BOLD activity for a Kanizsa illusory shape stimulus, in which pacmen-like inducers elicit an illusory shape percept, was either enhanced or suppressed relative to a nonillusory control configuration depending on whether the spatial profile of BOLD activity in early visual cortex was related to the illusory shape or the inducers, respectively. The authors argued that these findings fit well with the predictive coding framework, because top-down predictions related to the illusory shape are not met with bottom-up sensory input and hence the feedforward error signal is enhanced. Conversely, for the inducing elements, there is a match between top-down predictions and input, leading to a decrease in error. Rather than invoking predictive coding as the explanatory framework, the suppressive effect related to the inducers might be caused by neural adaptation to perceptually stable input due to the trial sequence used in the experiment.
    01/2015; 6(1):41-44. DOI:10.1068/i0689
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Occlusion edges in images which correspond to range discontinuity in the scene from the point of view of the observer are an important prerequisite for many vision and mobile robot tasks. Although they can be extracted from range data however extracting them from images and videos would be extremely beneficial. We trained a deep convolutional neural network (CNN) to identify occlusion edges in images and videos with both RGB-D and RGB inputs. The use of CNN avoids hand-crafting of features for automatically isolating occlusion edges and distinguishing them from appearance edges. Other than quantitative occlusion edge detection results, qualitative results are provided to demonstrate the trade-off between high resolution analysis and frame-level computation time which is critical for real-time robotics applications.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Schizophrenia patients poorly perceive Kanizsa figures and integrate co-aligned contour elements (Gabors). They also poorly process low spatial frequencies (SFs), which presumably reflects dysfunction along the dorsal pathway. Can contour grouping deficits be explained in terms of the spatial frequency content of the display elements? To address the question, we tested patients and matched controls on three contour grouping paradigms in which the SF composition was modulated. In the Kanizsa task, subjects discriminated quartets of sectored circles (“pac-men”) that either formed or did not form Kanizsa shapes (illusory and fragmented conditions, respectively). In contour integration, subjects identified the screen quadrant thought to contain a closed chain of co-circular Gabors. In collinear facilitation, subjects attempted to detect a central low-contrast element flanked by collinear or orthogonal high-contrast elements, and facilitation corresponded to the amount by which collinear flankers reduced contrast thresholds. We varied SF by modifying the element features in the Kanizsa task and by scaling the entire stimulus display in the remaining tasks (SFs ranging from 4 to 12 cycles/deg). Irrespective of SF, patients were worse at discriminating illusory, but not fragmented shapes. Contrary to our hypothesis, collinear facilitation and contour integration were abnormal in the clinical group only for the higher SF (>=10 c/deg). Grouping performance correlated with clinical variables, such as conceptual disorganization, general symptoms, and levels of functioning. In schizophrenia, three forms of contour grouping impairments prominently arise and cannot be attributed to poor low SF processing. Neurobiological and clinical implications are discussed.
    Neuropsychologia 11/2014; 65. DOI:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.10.031 · 3.45 Impact Factor

Questions & Answers about this publication

  • David Charles Wright-Carr added an answer in Art & Neuroscience:
    Arnheim's writing on perception and art
    Arnheim wrote extensively on psychology and art. I would be really interested to hear what people on Researchgate think about his work now as his writing is getting to be rather old? How well do you think this has stood up to the test of time?
    David Charles Wright-Carr · Universidad de Guanajuato

    Dear Paul:

    The following comment refers not to Arnheim's work, but to the contemporary relevance of Gestalt vision research in general.

    I am presently reading the 2006 English tranlation of Wolfgang Metzger's book Laws of seeing (originally published in 1936), and I find that most of it holds up very well, in general, in the light of recent vision research. The "Introduction to the English translation," by Lothar Spillman, provides context and explains why the book is relevant today. See:

    Metzger, Wolfgang. Laws of seeing, Lothar Spillmann, Steven Lehar, Mimsey Stromeyer & Michael Wertheimer, translators, Cambridge/London, The MIT Press, 2009.

    Here is a review:

    Reeves, Adam (2007). "Metzger's challenge," Advances in Cognitive Psychology (Faculty of Management and Finance, University of Finance and Management in Warsaw), vol. 3, nos. 1-2, p. 361 (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Adam_Reeves/publication/47244181_Metzger's_Challenge/links/02e7e538f2f5b39fb9000000.pdf, access: 28 June 2015).

    Today I downloaded several relatively recent articles that incorporate Gestalt vision research. The last one on this list (Wagemans, et al.) is especially interesting (and Arnheim is mentioned there a couple of times).

    Ehrenstein, Walter H.; Spillmann, Lothar; Sarris, Viktor (2003). “Gestalt issues in modern neuroscience”, Axiomathes (Kluwer Academic Publishers), vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 433-458 (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/240915060_Gestalt_Issues_in_Modern_Neuroscience, access: 28 Junio 2015).

    Gestalt ReVision (undated). GestaltReVision, perceptual organizarion in the context of a dynamical and hierarchical visual brain (http://www.Gestaltrevision.be/en/, access: 28 June 2015).

    Lehar, Steven M. (2009). “Gestalt isomorphism and the quantification of spatial perception,” Gestalt Theory (Official Journal of the Society for Gestalt Theory and its Applications), vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 122-139 (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228819544_Gestalt_isomorphism_and_the_quantification_of_spatial_perception, access: 28 June 2015).

    Murray, Micah M.; Herrmann, Cristoph S. (2013). “Illusory contours: a window onto the neurophysiology of constructing perception,” Trends in Cognitive Sciences (Elsevier), vol. 17, no. 9, September 2013, pp. 471-481 (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/13646613/17/9, access: 28 June 2015).

    Wagemans, Johan; Elder, James H.; Kubovy, Michael; Palmer, Stephen E.; Peterson, Mary A.; Singh, Manish; Heydt, Rüdiger von der (2012). “A century of Gestalt psychology in visual perception: I. Perceptual grouping and figure-ground organization,” Psychological Bulletin (American Psychological Association), vol. 138, no. 6, pp. 1172-1217 (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230587594_A_Century_of_Gestalt_Psychology_in_Visual_Perception_I._Perceptual_Grouping_and_Figure-Ground_Organization, access: 28 June 2015).