Visual perception

Page issues

Visual perception is the ability to interpret

the surrounding environment using light in
the visible spectrum reflected by the
objects in the environment. This is
different from visual acuity which refers to
how clearly a person sees (for example
"20/20 vision"). A person can have
problem with visual perceptual processing
even if he/she has 20/20 vision.
The resulting perception is also known as
visual perception, eyesight, sight, or vision
(adjectival form: visual, optical, or ocular).
The various physiological components
involved in vision are referred to
collectively as the visual system, and are
the focus of much research in linguistics,
psychology, cognitive science,
neuroscience, and molecular biology,
collectively referred to as vision science.

Visual system
The visual system in animals allows
individuals to assimilate information from
their surroundings. The act of seeing
starts when the cornea and then the lens
of the eye focuses light from its
surroundings onto a light-sensitive
membrane in the back of the eye, called
the retina. The retina is actually part of the
brain that is isolated to serve as a
transducer for the conversion of light into
neuronal signals. Based on feedback from
the visual system, the lens of the eye
adjusts its thickness to focus light on the
photoreceptive cells of the retina, also
known as the rods and cones, which
detect the photons of light and respond by
producing neural impulses. These signals
are processed via complex feedforward
and feedback processes by different parts
of the brain, from the retina upstream to
central ganglia in the brain.

Note that up until now much of the above

paragraph could apply to octopuses,
mollusks, worms, insects and things more
primitive; anything with a more
concentrated nervous system and better
eyes than say a jellyfish. However, the
following applies to mammals generally
and birds (in modified form): The retina in
these more complex animals sends fibers
(the optic nerve) to the lateral geniculate
nucleus, to the primary and secondary
visual cortex of the brain. Signals from the
retina can also travel directly from the
retina to the superior colliculus.

The perception of objects and the totality

of the visual scene is accomplished by the
visual association cortex. The visual
association cortex combines all sensory
information perceived by the striate cortex
which contains thousands of modules that
are part of modular neural networks. The
neurons in the striate cortex send axons to
the extrastriate cortex, a region in the
visual association cortex that surrounds
the striate cortex.[1]
The human visual system is generally
believed to perceive visible light in the
range of wavelengths between 370 and
730 nanometers (0.00000037 to
0.00000073 meters) of the
electromagnetic spectrum.[2] However,
some research suggests that humans can
perceive light in wavelengths down to 340
nanometers (UV-A), especially the
young.[3]

Study
The major problem in visual perception is
that what people see is not simply a
translation of retinal stimuli (i.e., the image
on the retina). Thus people interested in
perception have long struggled to explain
what visual processing does to create
what is actually seen.

Early studies

The visual dorsal stream (green) and ventral stream

(purple) are shown. Much of the human cerebral cortex
is involved in vision.
There were two major ancient Greek
schools, providing a primitive explanation
of how vision is carried out in the body.

The first was the "emission theory" which

maintained that vision occurs when rays
emanate from the eyes and are
intercepted by visual objects. If an object
was seen directly it was by 'means of rays'
coming out of the eyes and again falling
on the object. A refracted image was,
however, seen by 'means of rays' as well,
which came out of the eyes, traversed
through the air, and after refraction, fell on
the visible object which was sighted as the
result of the movement of the rays from
the eye. This theory was championed by
scholars like Euclid and Ptolemy and their
followers.

The second school advocated the so-

called 'intro-mission' approach which sees
vision as coming from something entering
the eyes representative of the object. With
its main propagators Aristotle, Galen and
their followers, this theory seems to have
some contact with modern theories of
what vision really is, but it remained only a
speculation lacking any experimental
foundation. (In eighteenth-century
England, Isaac Newton, John Locke, and
others, carried the
intromission/intromittist theory forward by
insisting that vision involved a process in
which rays—composed of actual corporeal
matter—emanated from seen objects and
entered the seer's mind/sensorium
through the eye's aperture.)[4]

Both schools of thought relied upon the

principle that "like is only known by like",
and thus upon the notion that the eye was
composed of some "internal fire" which
interacted with the "external fire" of visible
light and made vision possible. Plato
makes this assertion in his dialogue
Timaeus, as does Aristotle, in his De
Sensu.[5]
Leonardo da Vinci: The eye has a central line and
everything that reaches the eye through this central
line can be seen distinctly.

Alhazen (965 – c. 1040) carried out many

investigations and experiments on visual
perception, extended the work of Ptolemy
on binocular vision, and commented on
the anatomical works of Galen.[6][7] He was
the first person to explain that vision
occurs when light bounces on an object
and then is directed to one's eyes.[8]
Leonardo da Vinci (1452–1519) is
believed to be the first to recognize the
special optical qualities of the eye. He
wrote "The function of the human eye ...
was described by a large number of
authors in a certain way. But I found it to
be completely different." His main
experimental finding was that there is only
a distinct and clear vision at the line of
sight—the optical line that ends at the
fovea. Although he did not use these
words literally he actually is the father of
the modern distinction between foveal and
peripheral vision.
Issac Newton (1642–1726/27) was the
first to discover through experimentation,
by isolating individual colors of the
spectrum of light passing through a prism,
that the visually perceived color of objects
appeared due to the character of light the
objects reflected, and that these divided
colors could not be changed into any other
color, which was contrary to scientific
expectation of the day.[9]

Unconscious inference

Hermann von Helmholtz is often credited

with the first study of visual perception in
modern times. Helmholtz examined the
human eye and concluded that it was,
optically, rather poor. The poor-quality
information gathered via the eye seemed
to him to make vision impossible. He
therefore concluded that vision could only
be the result of some form of unconscious
inferences: a matter of making
assumptions and conclusions from
incomplete data, based on previous
experiences.[10]

Inference requires prior experience of the

world.

Examples of well-known assumptions,

based on visual experience, are:
 light comes from above
objects are normally not viewed from
below
faces are seen (and recognized)
upright.[11]
closer objects can block the view of
more distant objects, but not vice versa
figures (i.e., foreground objects) tend to
have convex borders

The study of visual illusions (cases when

the inference process goes wrong) has
yielded much insight into what sort of
assumptions the visual system makes.
Another type of the unconscious inference
hypothesis (based on probabilities) has
recently been revived in so-called Bayesian
studies of visual perception.[12]
Proponents of this approach consider that
the visual system performs some form of
Bayesian inference to derive a perception
from sensory data. However, it is not clear
how proponents of this view derive, in
principle, the relevant probabilities
required by the Bayesian equation. Models
based on this idea have been used to
describe various visual perceptual
functions, such as the perception of
motion, the perception of depth, and
figure-ground perception.[13][14] The "wholly
empirical theory of perception" is a related
and newer approach that rationalizes
visual perception without explicitly
invoking Bayesian formalisms.

Gestalt theory

Gestalt psychologists working primarily in

the 1930s and 1940s raised many of the
research questions that are studied by
vision scientists today[15].

The Gestalt Laws of Organization have

guided the study of how people perceive
visual components as organized patterns
or wholes, instead of many different parts.
"Gestalt" is a German word that partially
translates to "configuration or pattern"
along with "whole or emergent structure".
According to this theory, there are eight
main factors that determine how the visual
system automatically groups elements
into patterns: Proximity, Similarity, Closure,
Symmetry, Common Fate (i.e. common
motion), Continuity as well as Good
Gestalt (pattern that is regular, simple, and
orderly) and Past Experience.

Analysis of eye movement

Eye movement first 2 seconds (Yarbus, 1967)

During the 1960s, technical development

permitted the continuous registration of
eye movement during reading[16] in picture
viewing[17] and later in visual problem
solving[18] and when headset-cameras
became available, also during driving.[19]

The picture to the right shows what may

happen during the first two seconds of
visual inspection. While the background is
out of focus, representing the peripheral
vision, the first eye movement goes to the
boots of the man (just because they are
very near the starting fixation and have a
reasonable contrast).

The following fixations jump from face to

face. They might even permit comparisons
between faces.

It may be concluded that the icon face is a

very attractive search icon within the
peripheral field of vision. The foveal vision
adds detailed information to the peripheral
first impression.

It can also be noted that there are different

types of eye movements: fixational eye
movements (microsaccades, ocular drift,
and tremor), vergence movements,
saccadic movements and pursuit
movements. Fixations are comparably
static points where the eye rests. However,
the eye is never completely still, but gaze
position will drift. These drifts are in turn
corrected by microsaccades, very small
fixational eye-movements. Vergence
movements involve the cooperation of
both eyes to allow for an image to fall on
the same area of both retinas. This results
in a single focused image. Saccadic
movements is the type of eye movement
that makes jumps from one position to
another position and is used to rapidly
scan a particular scene/image. Lastly,
pursuit movement is smooth eye
movement and is used to follow objects in
motion.[20]

Face and object recognition

There is considerable evidence that face

and object recognition are accomplished
by distinct systems. For example,
prosopagnosic patients show deficits in
face, but not object processing, while
object agnosic patients (most notably,
patient C.K.) show deficits in object
processing with spared face
processing.[21] Behaviorally, it has been
shown that faces, but not objects, are
subject to inversion effects, leading to the
claim that faces are "special".[21][22]
Further, face and object processing recruit
distinct neural systems.[23] Notably, some
have argued that the apparent
specialization of the human brain for face
processing does not reflect true domain
specificity, but rather a more general
process of expert-level discrimination
within a given class of stimulus,[24] though
this latter claim is the subject of
substantial debate. Using fMRI and
electrophysiology Doris Tsao and
colleagues described brain regions and a
mechanism for face recognition in
macaque monkeys.[25]

The cognitive and

computational approaches
In the 1970s, David Marr developed a
multi-level theory of vision, which analyzed
the process of vision at different levels of
abstraction. In order to focus on the
understanding of specific problems in
vision, he identified three levels of
analysis: the computational, algorithmic
and implementational levels. Many vision
scientists, including Tomaso Poggio, have
embraced these levels of analysis and
employed them to further characterize
vision from a computational perspective.

The computational level addresses, at a

high level of abstraction, the problems that
the visual system must overcome. The
algorithmic level attempts to identify the
strategy that may be used to solve these
problems. Finally, the implementational
level attempts to explain how solutions to
these problems are realized in neural
circuitry.

Marr suggested that it is possible to

investigate vision at any of these levels
independently. Marr described vision as
proceeding from a two-dimensional visual
array (on the retina) to a three-dimensional
description of the world as output. His
stages of vision include:

A 2D or primal sketch of the scene,

based on feature extraction of
fundamental components of the scene,
including edges, regions, etc. Note the
similarity in concept to a pencil sketch
drawn quickly by an artist as an
impression.
A 2½ D sketch of the scene, where
textures are acknowledged, etc. Note
the similarity in concept to the stage in
drawing where an artist highlights or
 shades areas of a scene, to provide
depth.
A 3 D model, where the scene is
visualized in a continuous, 3-
dimensional map.[26]

Marr's 2.5D sketch assumes that a depth

map is constructed, and that this map is
the basis of 3D shape perception.
However, both stereoscopic and pictorial
perception, as well as monocular viewing,
make clear that the perception of 3D
shape precedes, and does not rely on, the
perception of the depth of points. It is not
clear how a preliminary depth map could,
in principle, be constructed, nor how this
would address the question of figure-
ground organization, or grouping. The role
of perceptual organizing constraints,
overlooked by Marr, in the production of
3D shape percepts from binocularly-
viewed 3D objects has been demonstrated
empirically for the case of 3D wire objects,
e.g.[27] For a more detailed discussion, see
Pizlo (2008).[28]

Transduction
Transduction is the process through which
energy from environmental stimuli is
converted to neural activity for the brain to
understand and process. The back of the
eye contains three different cell layers:
photoreceptor layer, bipolar cell layer and
ganglion cell layer. The photoreceptor layer
is at the very back and contains rod
photoreceptors and cone photoreceptors.
Cones are responsible for color
perception. There are three different
cones: red, green and blue. Rods, are
responsible for the perception of objects
in low light.[29] Photoreceptors contain
within them a special chemical called a
photopigment, which are embedded in the
membrane of the lamellae; a single human
rod contains approximately 10 million of
them. The photopigment molecules
consist of two parts: an opsin (a protein)
and retinal (a lipid).[30] There are 3 specific
photopigments (each with their own color)
that respond to specific wavelengths of
light. When the appropriate wavelength of
light hits the photoreceptor, its
photopigment splits into two, which sends
a message to the bipolar cell layer, which
in turn sends a message to the ganglion
cells, which then send the information
through the optic nerve to the brain. If the
appropriate photopigment is not in the
proper photoreceptor (for example, a
green photopigment inside a red cone), a
condition called color vision deficiency will
occur.[31]
Opponent process
Transduction involves chemical messages
sent from the photoreceptors to the
bipolar cells to the ganglion cells. Several
photoreceptors may send their information
to one ganglion cell. There are two types
of ganglion cells: red/green and
yellow/blue. These neuron cells constantly
fire—even when not stimulated. The brain
interprets different colors (and with a lot of
information, an image) when the rate of
firing of these neurons alters. Red light
stimulates the red cone, which in turn
stimulates the red/green ganglion cell.
Likewise, green light stimulates the green
cone, which stimulates the red/green
ganglion cell and blue light stimulates the
blue cone which stimulates the
yellow/blue ganglion cell. The rate of firing
of the ganglion cells is increased when it
is signaled by one cone and decreased
(inhibited) when it is signaled by the other
cone. The first color in the name of the
ganglion cell is the color that excites it and
the second is the color that inhibits it. i.e.:
A red cone would excite the red/green
ganglion cell and the green cone would
inhibit the red/green ganglion cell. This is
an opponent process. If the rate of firing of
a red/green ganglion cell is increased, the
brain would know that the light was red, if
the rate was decreased, the brain would
know that the color of the light was
green.[31]

Artificial visual perception

Theories and observations of visual
perception have been the main source of
inspiration for computer vision (also called
machine vision, or computational vision).
Special hardware structures and software
algorithms provide machines with the
capability to interpret the images coming
from a camera or a sensor. Artificial Visual
Perception has long been used in the
industry and is now entering the domains
of automotive and robotics.[32][33]

See also
Color vision
Computer vision
Depth perception
Entoptic phenomenon
Gestalt psychology
Lateral masking
Naked eye

Machine vision
Motion perception
Multisensory integration
Spatial frequency
Visual illusion
Visual processing
 Visual system

Vision deficiencies or
disorders
Achromatopsia
Akinetopsia
Apperceptive agnosia
Associative visual agnosia
Color blindness
Hallucinogen persisting perception
disorder

Illusory palinopsia
Prosopagnosia
Refractive error
Recovery from blindness
Scotopic sensitivity syndrome
Visual agnosia
 Visual snow

Related disciplines

Cognitive science
Neuroscience
Ophthalmology

Optometry
Psychophysics

References
1. Carlson, Neil R. (2013). "6". Physiology of
Behaviour (11th ed.). Upper Saddle River,
New Jersey, USA: Pearson Education Inc.
pp. 187–189. ISBN 978-0-205-23939-9.
2. Margaret., Livingstone, (2008). Vision and
art : the biology of seeing. Hubel, David H.,.
New York: Abrams. ISBN 9780810995543.
OCLC 192082768 .
3. Brainard, George C.; Beacham, Sabrina;
Sanford, Britt E.; Hanifin, John P.; Streletz,
Leopold; Sliney, David (1999-03-01). "Near
ultraviolet radiation elicits visual evoked
potentials in children" . Clinical
Neurophysiology. 110 (3): 379–383.
doi:10.1016/S1388-2457(98)00022-4 .
ISSN 1388-2457 .
4. Swenson, Rivka. (Spring/Summer 2010).
Optics, Gender, and the Eighteenth-Century
Gaze: Looking at Eliza Haywood’s Anti-
Pamela. The Eighteenth Century: Theory
and Interpretation, 51.1-2, 27-43.
5. Finger, Stanley (1994). Origins of
neuroscience: a history of explorations into
brain function. Oxford [Oxfordshire]: Oxford
University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-506503-9.
OCLC 27151391 .
6. Howard, I (1996). "Alhazen's neglected
discoveries of visual phenomena".
Perception. 25 (10): 1203–1217.
doi:10.1068/p251203 . PMID 9027923 .
7. Khaleefa, Omar (1999). "Who Is the
Founder of Psychophysics and
Experimental Psychology?". American
Journal of Islamic Social Sciences. 16 (2):
1–26.
8. Adamson, Peter (7 July 2016).
Philosophy in the Islamic World: A History
of Philosophy Without Any Gaps . Oxford
University Press. p. 77. ISBN 978-0-19-
957749-1.
9. Margaret., Livingstone, (2008). Vision and
art : the biology of seeing. Hubel, David H.,.
New York: Abrams. ISBN 9780810995543.
OCLC 192082768 .
10. von Helmholtz, Hermann (1925).
Handbuch der physiologischen Optik . 3.
Leipzig: Voss.
11. Hans-Werner Hunziker, (2006) Im Auge
des Lesers: foveale und periphere
Wahrnehmung – vom Buchstabieren zur
Lesefreude [In the eye of the reader: foveal
and peripheral perception – from letter
recognition to the joy of reading]
Transmedia Stäubli Verlag Zürich 2006
ISBN 978-3-7266-0068-6
12. Stone, JV (2011). "Footprints sticking
out of the sand. Part 2: children's Bayesian
priors for shape and lighting direction".
Perception. 40 (2): 175–90.
doi:10.1068/p6776 . PMID 21650091 .
13. Mamassian, Pascal; Landy, Michael;
Maloney, Laurence T. (2002). "Bayesian
Modelling of Visual Perception" . In Rao,
Rajesh P. N.; Olshausen, Bruno A.; Lewicki,
Michael S. Probabilistic Models of the Brain:
Perception and Neural Function. Neural
Information Processing. MIT Press. pp. 13–
36. ISBN 978-0-262-26432-7.
14. "A Primer on Probabilistic Approaches
to Visual Perception" .
15. Wagemans, Johan (November 2012). "A
Century of Gestalt Psychology in Visual
Perception" . Psychological Bulletin. 138
(6): 1172–1217.
CiteSeerX 10.1.1.452.8394 .
doi:10.1037/a0029333 . PMC 3482144 .
PMID 22845751 .
16. Taylor, Stanford E. (November 1965).
"Eye Movements in Reading: Facts and
Fallacies". American Educational Research
Journal. 2 (4): 187–202.
doi:10.2307/1161646 . JSTOR 1161646 .
17. Yarbus, A. L. (1967). Eye movements
and vision, Plenum Press, New York
18. Hunziker, H. W. (1970). "Visuelle
Informationsaufnahme und Intelligenz: Eine
Untersuchung über die Augenfixationen
beim Problemlösen" [Visual information
acquisition and intelligence: A study of the
eye fixations in problem solving].
Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Psychologie
und Ihre Anwendungen (in German). 29
(1/2).
19. Cohen, A. S. (1983).
"Informationsaufnahme beim Befahren von
Kurven, Psychologie für die Praxis 2/83"
[Information recording when driving on
curves, psychology in practice 2/83].
Bulletin der Schweizerischen Stiftung für
Angewandte Psychologie.
20. Carlson, Neil R.; Heth, C. Donald; Miller,
Harold; Donahoe, John W.; Buskist, William;
Martin, G. Neil; Schmaltz, Rodney M. (2009).
Psychology the Science of Behaviour.
Toronto Ontario: Pearson Canada. pp. 140–
1. ISBN 978-0-205-70286-2.
21. Moscovitch, Morris; Winocur, Gordon;
Behrmann, Marlene (1997). "What Is Special
about Face Recognition? Nineteen
Experiments on a Person with Visual Object
Agnosia and Dyslexia but Normal Face
Recognition". Journal of Cognitive
Neuroscience. 9 (5): 555–604.
doi:10.1162/jocn.1997.9.5.555 .
PMID 23965118 .
22. Yin, Robert K. (1969). "Looking at
upside-down faces". Journal of
Experimental Psychology. 81 (1): 141–5.
doi:10.1037/h0027474 .
23. Kanwisher, Nancy; McDermott, Josh;
Chun, Marvin M. (June 1997). "The fusiform
face area: a module in human extrastriate
cortex specialized for face perception" . The
Journal of Neuroscience. 17 (11): 4302–11.
PMID 9151747 .
24. Gauthier, Isabel; Skudlarski, Pawel; Gore,
John C.; Anderson, Adam W. (February
2000). "Expertise for cars and birds recruits
brain areas involved in face recognition".
Nature Neuroscience. 3 (2): 191–7.
doi:10.1038/72140 . PMID 10649576 .
25. Chang, Le; Tsao, Doris Y. (2017-06-01).
"The Code for Facial Identity in the Primate
Brain" . Cell. 169 (6): 1013–1028.e14.
doi:10.1016/j.cell.2017.05.011 . ISSN 0092-
8674 . PMID 28575666 .
26. Marr, D (1982). Vision: A Computational
Investigation into the Human
Representation and Processing of Visual
Information. MIT Press.
27. Rock & DiVita, 1987; Pizlo and
Stevenson, 1999
28. 3D Shape, Z. Pizlo (2008) MIT Press)
29. Hecht, Selig (1937-04-01). "Rods, Cones,
and the Chemical Basis of Vision" .
Physiological Reviews. 17 (2): 239–290.
ISSN 0031-9333 .
30. Carlson, Neil R. (2013). "6". Physiology
of Behaviour (11th ed.). Upper Saddle River,
New Jersey, USA: Pearson Education Inc.
p. 170. ISBN 978-0-205-23939-9.
31. Carlson, Neil R.; Heth, C. Donald (2010).
"5". Psychology the science of behaviour
(2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey,
USA: Pearson Education Inc. pp. 138–145.
ISBN 978-0-205-64524-4.
32. Barghout, Lauren, and Lawrence W. Lee.
"Perceptual information processing
system". U.S. Patent Application
10/618,543, filed July 11, 2003.
33. Barghout, Lauren. "System and Method
for edge detection in image processing and
recognition". WIPO Patent No. 2007044828.
20 Apr. 2007.

Further reading
Von Helmholtz, Hermann (1867).
Handbuch der physiologischen Optik. 3.
Leipzig: Voss. Quotations are from the
English translation produced by Optical
Society of America (1924–25): Treatise
on Physiological Optics .

External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to
Sight.
Wikimedia Commons has media related to
Vision.

Wikiquote has quotations related to:

Vision

The dictionary definition of vision at

Wiktionary
The Organization of the Retina and
Visual System
Effect of Detail on Visual Perception by
Jon McLoone, the Wolfram
Demonstrations Project.
The Joy of Visual Perception Resource
on the eye's perception abilities.
 VisionScience. Resource for Research in
Human and Animal Vision A collection
of resources in vision science and
perception.
Vision and Psychophysics.
Visibility in Social Theory and Social
Research. An inquiry into the cognitive
and social meanings of visibility.
Vision Scholarpedia Expert articles
about Vision

Retrieved from
"https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
title=Visual_perception&oldid=879494950#Early_st
udies"
Last edited 43 minutes ago by Mr.L…

Content is available under CC BY-SA 3.0 unless

otherwise noted.