Advertisement

Science Friday
Visual illusion stumps adults but not kids
Finding suggests that sensitivity to visual context develops slowly
Web edition : Friday, November 20th, 2009
font_down font_up Text Size
access
SIZE DISGUISED In a new study of visual abilities, researchers asked volunteers to identify the biggest orange circle. Here, each orange circle on the right is 2 percent larger than the one on the left. Misleading images usually fooled adults but not children, while helpful images greatly aided adults but not kids.M. Doherty

Sometimes seeing means deceiving before believing, depending on your age. Children and adults size up objects differently, giving youngsters protection against a visual illusion that bedevils their elders, a new study suggests.

This unusual triumph of kids over grown-ups suggests that the brain’s capacity to consider the context of visual scenes, and not just focus on parts of scenes, develops slowly, say psychologist Martin Doherty of the University of Stirling in Scotland and his colleagues. Even at age 10, children lack adults’ attunement to visual context, Doherty’s team concludes in a paper published online November 12 in Developmental Science.

As a result, visual context can be experimentally manipulated to distort adults’ perception of objects’ sizes. But Doherty’s group finds that children, especially those younger than 7, show little evidence of altered size perception on a task called the Ebbinghaus illusion.

“When visual context is misleading, adults literally see the world less accurately than they did as children,” Doherty says.

This pattern holds for Scottish children and adults in the new study as well as for Japanese children and adults who participated in other investigations conducted by Doherty’s team.

Some researchers argue that East Asians focus broadly on the context of what they see while Westerners focus narrowly on central figures. Doherty says the new findings instead indicate that adults in both Scotland and Japan can’t help but track visual context, although this tendency was stronger in the Japanese adults.

Other investigators have noted that children with autism don’t succumb to visual size illusions, consistent with the idea that autism involves an excessive focus on details. But visual context largely eludes all young children, not just those with autism, Doherty asserts.

Even if the new findings hold up, it’s still possible that further research will show that children with autism develop a susceptibility to size illusions more slowly than those without it, remarks psychologist Danielle Ropar of the University of Nottingham in England.

Psychologist Carl Granrud of the University of Northern Colorado in Greeley calls the new study convincing but “somewhat surprising.” Children exhibit sensitivity to visual context on some other visual tasks, he says, such as one in which two equal-sized horizontal lines are perceived as differing in length when flanked by diagonal lines.

Earlier research has yielded conflicting evidence that children fall prey to the Ebbinghaus illusion, partly because of weaknesses in study designs, Doherty says.

His team studied 151 children, ages 4 to 10, recruited from a Scottish primary school and nursery school. Another 24 volunteers, ages 18 to 25, were college students.

Participants viewed a series of images containing pairs of orange circles in which one circle was 2 percent to 18 percent larger than the other. An experimenter asked participants to point to the circle that “looked bigger.”

Control images showed only two orange circles. In other images, each orange circle was surrounded by gray circles intended either to hinder or aid accurate size perception.

Misleading images showed the smaller orange circle surrounded by even smaller gray circles to boost its apparent size. Large gray circles surrounding the larger orange circle were intended to shrink its apparent size.

In helpful images, large gray circles surrounded the smaller orange circle to make it appear smaller than it actually was. Small circles surrounded the larger orange circle to magnify its apparent size.

Four-year-olds correctly identified the larger circle in 79 percent of control images. That figure rose with age, reaching 95 percent in adults.

For 4- to 6-year-olds, accuracy of size perception for misleading images remained at about what it was for control images. Misleading images increasingly elicited errors from older children and tricked adults most of the time. Adults made almost no errors on helpful images. Kids from age 7 to 10 erred on a minority of helpful images, while 4- to 6-year-olds performed no better than chance.


Found in: Humans and Psychology
Comments 6
  • I'm sorry, this is hoky. Do they really expect a human to eyeball a 2% difference in the size of a circle? If so, all it shows is that the children in the study have better vision than the college students. How did they check the ability to see such details?

    Please show us the control images, too.

    Solo Owl Solo Owl
    Nov. 21, 2009 at 8:03am
  • The top image, "no context" is a 2% difference control image. Even with the lower resolution used in this article, I'd say the one on the right looks bigger. 4- to 6-year-olds were about 60% successful at identifying the bigger circle at 2% differences, so long as there were no surround circles. Adults were at about 80%. Size differences went up to 18%.
    Martin Doherty Martin Doherty
    Nov. 25, 2009 at 6:10am
  • On my (fairly high resolution) screen the circles are roughly 3mm across, a 2% difference would make the one on the right 0.06mm bigger on the diameter. I calculate a pixel to be 0.18mm wide so I would say that it's impossible to tell the difference visually unless the test was conducted with a much larger image.
    Steve McVey Steve McVey
    Nov. 27, 2009 at 4:28am
  • Were the kids "fooled" by the question or "not fooled" by the context? Maybe kids don't know the difference between "is bigger" (objective) and "looks bigger" (subjective). When asked "looks" I would allow my answer to be biased by the illusion, if asked "is" I would attempt to ignore the bias and try to determine which really is bigger. Can a child say the same thing? (meaning, do they really understand the difference between "looks" and "is" different.) If not then one can not compare the results from adults and children.
    Gregory LeVee Gregory LeVee
    Dec. 22, 2009 at 8:49pm
  • Illusions are sometimes made by children more better than adults and can get a better picture of the context.

    Its like at every age there are some pros and cons.

    [Link was removed]
    [Link was removed]
    [Link was removed]
    farhaj ch farhaj ch
    Jan. 4, 2010 at 7:39am
  • optical capacity in children is very sensitive compared to adults. This is not an illusion but a natural ability possessed only by the children

    [Link was removed]
    [Link was removed]
    [Link was removed]
    [Link was removed]
    Doctor You Doctor You
    Jan. 16, 2010 at 7:13am
Post a comment (Please note: All links will be removed from comments.)

Please login or register to participate.


Advertisement
Suggested Reading:
seperator
  • Doherty, M. et al. 2008. The context sensitivity of visual size perception varies across cultures. Perception 37: 1426.
    doi:10.1068/p5946.
  • For more information about Martin Doherty’s research: [Go to]
Citations & References:
seperator
  • Doherty, M. et al. 2009. The Ebbinghaus illusion deceives adults but not young children. Developmental Science, published online Nov. 12.
    doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2009.00931.x.

Reader Favorites:
seperator
SN on the Web:
seperator