Effects of Method, Orientation, and Size of Angle on the Ponzo Illusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Ponzo figure was used to test predictions based upon Pressey's 1971 concept of attentive fields. Subjects made judgements using either the method of successive reproduction (n = 18) or the method of reproduction (n = 17). Size of the acute angle between the oblique and test lines (30 degrees, 45 degrees, and 60 degrees) and orientation of test figures (apex pointed up, left, right, and down) were varied. It was predicted with the method of successive reproduction that illusions of shrinkage would occur and that the variable of orientation would not affect size of illusion. With the method of reproduction the prediction was made that illusions of expansion would occur when the apex pointed up and that illusions of shrinkage would occur when the apex pointed down. Analysis showed that with the method of successive reproduction illusions of shrinkage occurred when the apex was pointed either up or down. When the apex pointed either to the right or left nonsignificant illusions were found. With the method of reproduction the classical illusion of expansion occurred when the apex pointed up but changed to one of shrinkage when the apex pointed down. Size of expansion illusion diminished as the acute angle formed between the oblique and standard lines decreased. In general, some of the results were consistent with Pressey's concept of attentive fields.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".