Muller-Lyer Illusion

Introduction:

Psychophysics:

One of the oldest problems in psychology is the relation between variations in physical
stimulation and reported experience. Psychophysics is the earliest branch of experimental
psychology. Experiments here relate variations in stimuli to variations in response. The methods
used to study stimulus-response relationships in these situations are commonly called
Psychophysical methods. They can be employed in the study of complex perceptions as well as
for investigating simpler sensory phenomena.

The two psychophysical methods to be considered are:

1. The method of average error, sometimes called the adjustment method.

2. The method of limits, sometimes called the method of minimal changes.

Method of Average Error:

This method is also known as ‘Method of Equation’, ‘Method of adjustment’ and ‘Method of
reproduction’. The subject is presented with a standard stimulus and a variable stimulus and the
latter is adjusted until the subject judges that standard and variable stimuli are equal. A number
of such judgments are obtained from the subject and their mean is taken as the ‘S’ value, which
is equivalent to standard weights under the prevailing experimental condition.

Muller Lyer Illusion:

Geometrical illusions, of which Muller-Lyer is an illustration, is an example of how our

discriminable processes do not faithfully represent the objective world. We do not always see
things as they exist in physically measured reality. In the Muller-Lyer illusion, we tend to
underestimate the length of the arrowhead line. The constant error gives the quantitative measure
of the extent of illusion. The movement error is the bias which the subject may have for moving
the variable outward (ascending series) as compared to moving it inward (descending series), or
vice-versa.
Review of Literature:

1. “Size-contrast illusions deceive the eye but not the hand”

In this study conducted by Aglioti, Salvatore, Joseph FX DeSouza, and Melvyn A.
Goodale, 14 subjects underwent an experiment involving a variation of the ‘Titchener
circles’ illusion in which two target circles of equal size surrounded by a circular array of
either smaller or larger circles, are presented side by side. In the study, two thin ‘poker-
chip’ discs were used as the target circles instead. The size of the two discs was
randomly varied so that on some trials the discs appeared perceptually different but were
physically equivalent in size, and on other trials, were physically different but appeared
perceptually equivalent. and their perceptual judgment was recorded. It was found that
the automatic and metrically accurate adjustments required for skilled actions are
mediated by visual processes that are different and separate from those mediating the
conscious experiential perception.
Citation: Coren, Stanley. "An efferent component in the visual perception of direction
and extent." Psychological Review 93.4 (1986): 391.

Problem:

To determine the extent of Muller-Lyer’s illusion by the method of average error.

Hypothesis:

“The extent of illusion varies with the direction of movement (Ascending and descending).”

Plan:

Ascending and descending series to be done alternatively. In each trial, the subject manipulates
the variable stimulus to make it equal to the standard length of 16 cm.

Materials:

a) The Muller-Lyer illusion board.

b) Writing materials.
Variables:

Independent Variable: The direction in which the subject varies the length of the variable line.

Dependent Variable: The error committed by the subject.

Experimental controls:

1. The experimenter should make sure that the subject has understood the instructions.
2. The distance between the subject and the apparatus is kept constant.
3. The variable line should be held definitely longer in the descending series and shorter in
the ascending series.
4. The starting point of the variable line should vary from trial to trial to avoid habituation.

Procedure:

The subject is made to sit comfortably. The apparatus is placed at a distance of two feet from the
subject and the Muller-Lyer illusion board is adjusted to the eye level of the subject. The subject
is shown the standard and variable lines.

Ascending series:

Keep the variable line definitely shorter than the standard line in the ascending series. Instruct
the subject to slowly increase the length of the variable line, till they feel it is equal to the
standard line. When the subject stops moving with the length of the variable line adjusted as
equal to the standard line is noted down with the help of the scale provided behind the apparatus,
by the experimenter. Ten trials are given.

Descending series:

The length of the variable line is kept definitely longer than the standard line in the descending
series. The subject is instructed to slowly decrease the length of the variable line till they feel it is
equal to the standard line. The length of the variable line was adjusted as equal to the standard
line. The length of the variable line is equal to the standard line is noted down with the help of
the scale behind the apparatus by the experimenter. Ten trials are given here also.

Note: The ascending and descending trials are given alternately to eliminate the practice effect.
Instructions:

Ascending series:

“The line between the two arrowheads is the standard line and its length remains constant. The
line between the two feather-heads is the variable line and its length can be carried by
manipulation. In this series, the variable line is held shorter than the standard line. Slowly
increase the length of the variable line till you feel it is equal to the standard line.”

Descending series:

“Now the variable line is held longer than the standard. Decrease the length of the variable line.
Stop when you feel that the length of the variable line is equal to the length of the standard line.”

Experimental Controls:

The distance between the subject and the apparatus should be two feet.

Analysis of Data:

1. In each trial, the subject’s judgment of the length of the variable line is noted by the
experimenter. This is the point of subjective equality (PSE).
2. The mean PSE is calculated for each series.
3. The constant error (CE) is calculated in each series.
CE (Ascending) = Mean PSE (Ascending) – Standard line (16 cm)
CE (Descending) = Mean PSE (Descending) – Standard line (16 cm)
4. Calculate the Mean CE
Mean. CE = CE(Ascending) + CE(Descending)/2
5. The movement error is calculated by using the formula
Mean PSE(Descending) – Mean PSE(Ascending)/2
Discussion:

Table 1: The readings of the subject in the ascending and descending series.

Name of the Participant: PH

Trials Ascending Descending

1 13 10.1

2 10.2 14.2

3 10.2 8.5

4 11.2 16

5 12.9 11.3

6 13.4 10.7

7 10.4 10.8

8 14 10.3

9 8.9 10.2

10 10.7 15.2

Total 114.9 117.3

Mean 11.49 11.73

Calculations:

CE (Ascending) = Mean PSE (Ascending) – Standard line

CE (Descending) = Mean PSE (Descending) – Standard line

CE (Ascending) = 11.49 - 16 = -4.51

CE (Descending) = 11.73 – 16 = -4.27

Mean CE = CE (Ascending + Descending)/2

= (-4.51-4.27)/2 = -4.39

Movement Error = Mean PSE(Descending) – Mean PSE(Ascending)/2

= 11.73-11.49/2 = 0.12

Table 2: Entries of constant error and Mean constant Error and Movement Error.

Name Constant Error Mean CE Movement Error

Ascending Descending
PH -4.51 -4.27 -4.39 0.12

Demographic details:

The experiment was conducted on a 20-year-old male student studying in a college. Looking at
table 12, it can be seen that the mean constant error is -4.39 and the movement error is 0.12. This
shows that the subject proves the hypothesis and shows that meaning has a positive effect on
retention.

Conclusion:

The subject proves the hypostasis as the movement error is greater than 0 (0.12) hence proving
that the extent of illusion varies with the direction of movement (Ascending and descending).