Age-related changes in the susceptibility to visual illusions of size.
Aging
Size perception
Visual illusions
Visual perception
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
25 06 2024
25 06 2024
Historique:
received:
20
04
2024
accepted:
19
06
2024
medline:
26
6
2024
pubmed:
26
6
2024
entrez:
25
6
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
As the global population ages, understanding of the effect of aging on visual perception is of growing importance. This study investigates age-related changes in adulthood along size perception through the lens of three visual illusions: the Ponzo, Ebbinghaus, and Height-width illusions. Utilizing the Bayesian conceptualization of the aging brain, which posits increased reliance on prior knowledge with age, we explored potential differences in the susceptibility to visual illusions across different age groups in adults (ages 20-85 years). To this end, we used the BTPI (Ben-Gurion University Test for Perceptual Illusions), an online validated battery of visual illusions developed in our lab. The findings revealed distinct patterns of age-related changes for each of the illusions, challenging the idea of a generalized increase in reliance on prior knowledge with age. Specifically, we observed a systematic reduction in susceptibility to the Ebbinghaus illusion with age, while susceptibility to the Height-width illusion increased with age. As for the Ponzo illusion, there were no significant changes with age. These results underscore the complexity of age-related changes in visual perception and converge with previous findings to support the idea that different visual illusions of size are mediated by distinct perceptual mechanisms.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38918501
doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-65405-6
pii: 10.1038/s41598-024-65405-6
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
14583Subventions
Organisme : Israel Science Foundation
ID : 543/19
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Kensinger, E. A. & Gutchess, A. H. Cognitive aging in a social and affective context: Advances over the past 50 years. J. Gerontol. B Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 72(1), 61–70 (2017).
doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbw056
pubmed: 27233290
Boutet, I. & Meinhardt-Injac, B. Measurement of individual differences in face-identity processing abilities in older adults. Cogn. Res. Princ. Implic. 6, 1–11 (2021).
Stantić, M., Hearne, B., Catmur, C. & Bird, G. Use of the Oxford face matching test reveals an effect of ageing on face perception but not face memory. Cortex 145, 226–235 (2021).
doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2021.08.016
pubmed: 34763129
Allard, R., Renaud, J., Molinatti, S. & Faubert, J. Contrast sensitivity, healthy aging and noise. Vis. Res. 92, 47–52 (2013).
doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2013.09.004
pubmed: 24070688
Pardhan, S. Contrast sensitivity loss with aging: Sampling efficiency and equivalent noise at different spatial frequencies. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 21(2), 169–175 (2004).
doi: 10.1364/JOSAA.21.000169
Ross, J. E., Clarke, D. D. & Bron, A. J. Effect of age on contrast sensitivity function: Uniocular and binocular findings. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 69(1), 51–56 (1985).
doi: 10.1136/bjo.69.1.51
pubmed: 3965028
pmcid: 1040522
Fischer, B. & Hartnegg, K. Age effects in dynamic vision based on orientation identification. Exp. Brain Res. 143, 120–125 (2002).
doi: 10.1007/s00221-001-0984-6
pubmed: 11907697
Pilz, K. S., Äijälä, J. M. & Manassi, M. Selective age-related changes in orientation perception. J. Vis. 20(13), 13–13 (2020).
doi: 10.1167/jov.20.13.13
pubmed: 33351062
pmcid: 7757627
Roy, M. S., Podgor, M. J., Collier, B. & Gunkel, R. D. Color vision and age in a normal North American population. Graefe’s Arch. Clin. Exp. Ophthalmol. 229, 139–144 (1991).
doi: 10.1007/BF00170545
Billino, J., Bremmer, F. & Gegenfurtner, K. R. Differential aging of motion processing mechanisms: Evidence against general perceptual decline. Vis. Res. 48(10), 1254–1261 (2008).
doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2008.02.014
pubmed: 18396307
Billino, J. & Pilz, K. S. Motion perception as a model for perceptual aging. J. Vis. 19(4), 3–3 (2019).
doi: 10.1167/19.4.3
pubmed: 30943529
Andersen, G. J. Aging and vision: Changes in function and performance from optics to perception. Wiley Interdiscipl. Rev. Cogn. Sci. 3(3), 403–410 (2012).
doi: 10.1002/wcs.1167
Owsley, C. Aging and vision. Vis. Res. 51(13), 1610–1622 (2011).
doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2010.10.020
pubmed: 20974168
Ma, W. J., Kording, K. P., & Goldreich, D. Bayesian Models of Perception and Action: An Introduction (MIT Press, 2023).
Petzschner, F. H., Glasauer, S. & Stephan, K. E. A Bayesian perspective on magnitude estimation. Trends Cogn. Sci. 19(5), 285–293 (2015).
doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2015.03.002
pubmed: 25843543
Seriès, P. & Seitz, A. R. Learning what to expect (in visual perception). Front. Hum. Neurosci. 7, 668 (2013).
doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00668
pubmed: 24187536
pmcid: 3807544
Chan, J. S. et al. Predictive coding over the lifespan: Increased reliance on perceptual priors in older adults—A magnetoencephalography and dynamic causal modeling study. Front. Aging Neurosci. 13, 631599 (2021).
doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2021.631599
pubmed: 33897405
pmcid: 8062739
Glisky, E. L. (2007). Changes in cognitive function in human aging. Brain Aging: Models, Methods, and Mechanisms, 1.
Moran, R. J., Symmonds, M., Dolan, R. J. & Friston, K. J. The brain ages optimally to model its environment: Evidence from sensory learning over the adult lifespan. PLoS Comput. Biol. 10(1), e1003422 (2014).
doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003422
pubmed: 24465195
pmcid: 3900375
Weiss, Y., Simoncelli, E. P. & Adelson, E. H. Motion illusions as optimal percepts. Nat. Neurosci. 5(6), 598–604 (2002).
doi: 10.1038/nn0602-858
pubmed: 12021763
Dowlati, E., Adams, S. E., Stiles, A. B. & Moran, R. J. Aging into perceptual control: A dynamic causal modeling for fMRI study of bistable perception. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 10, 141 (2016).
doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00141
pubmed: 27064235
pmcid: 4814553
Coren, S., Girgus, J. S., Erlichman, H. & Hakstian, A. R. An empirical taxonomy of visual illusions. Percept. Psychophys. 20(2), 129–137 (1976).
doi: 10.3758/BF03199444
Cretenoud, A. F. et al. Factors underlying visual illusions are illusion-specific but not feature-specific. J. Vis. 19(14), 12–12 (2019).
doi: 10.1167/19.14.12
pubmed: 31830241
Grzeczkowski, L., Clarke, A. M., Francis, G., Mast, F. W. & Herzog, M. H. About individual differences in vision. Vis. Res. 141, 282–292 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2016.10.006
pubmed: 27919676
Mazuz, Y., Kessler, Y. & Ganel, T. The BTPI: An online battery for measuring susceptibility to visual illusions. J. Vis. 23(10), 2–2 (2023).
doi: 10.1167/jov.23.10.2
pubmed: 37669069
pmcid: 10484025
Trewartha, K. M. & Flanagan, J. R. Distinct contributions of explicit and implicit memory processes to weight prediction when lifting objects and judging their weights: An aging study. J. Neurophysiol. 116(3), 1128–1136 (2016).
doi: 10.1152/jn.01051.2015
pubmed: 27306680
pmcid: 5013170
Hadad, B. S. & Yashar, A. Sensory perception in autism: What can we learn?. Annu. Rev. Vis. Sci. 8, 239–264 (2022).
doi: 10.1146/annurev-vision-093020-035217
pubmed: 35804481
Coren, S. & Porac, C. A new analysis of life-span age trends in visual illusion. Dev. Psychol. 14(2), 193 (1978).
doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.14.2.193
Leibowitz, H. W. & Judisch, J. M. The relation between age and the magnitude of the Ponzo illusion. Am. J. Psychol. 80(1), 105–109 (1967).
doi: 10.2307/1420548
pubmed: 6036344
Yildiz, G. Y., Sperandio, I., Kettle, C., & Chouinard, P. A. A review on various explanations of Ponzo-like illusions. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 1–28 (2022)..
Cretenoud, A. F., Francis, G. & Herzog, M. H. When illusions merge. J. Vis. 20(8), 1–15 (2020).
doi: 10.1167/jov.20.8.12
Norman, J. F., Baig, M., Eaton, J. R., Graham, J. D. & Vincent, T. E. Aging and the visual perception of object size. Sci. Rep. 12(1), 17148 (2022).
doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-22141-z
pubmed: 36229476
pmcid: 9561717
Del Viva, M. M. & Agostini, R. Visual spatial integration in the elderly. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 48(6), 2940–2946 (2007).
doi: 10.1167/iovs.06-0729
Kurylo, D. D., Allan, W. C., Collins, T. E. & Baron, J. Perceptual organization based upon spatial relationships in Alzheimer’s disease. Behav. Neurol. 14(1–2), 19–28 (2003).
doi: 10.1155/2003/856309
pubmed: 12719635
pmcid: 5497558
Roudaia, E., Bennett, P. J. & Sekuler, A. B. The effect of aging on contour integration. Vis. Res. 48(28), 2767–2774 (2008).
doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2008.07.026
pubmed: 18831983
Staudinger, M. R., Fink, G. R., Mackay, C. E. & Lux, S. Gestalt perception and the decline of global precedence in older subjects. Cortex 47(7), 854–862 (2011).
doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2010.08.001
pubmed: 20828678
Rashal, E., Cretenoud, A. F. & Herzog, M. H. Perceptual grouping leads to objecthood effects in the Ebbinghaus illusion. J. Vis. 20(8), 11–11 (2020).
doi: 10.1167/jov.20.8.11
pubmed: 32766742
pmcid: 7438686
Ganel, T. & Goodale, M. A. Visual control of action but not perception requires analytical processing of object shape. Nature 426 (6967), 664–667. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02156 (2003).
Loffler, G. Perception of contours and shapes: Low and intermediate stage mechanisms. Vis. Res. 48(20), 2106–2127 (2008).
doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2008.03.006
pubmed: 18502467
Meng, Q. et al. Age-related changes in local and global visual perception. J. Vis. 19(1), 10–10 (2019).
doi: 10.1167/19.1.10
pubmed: 30650433