Gold, Murray, Bennett, and Sekuler (
2000) used the response classification technique to provide a performance-based measure of the spatial properties of the completion process. Response classification (Ahumada,
2002; Ahumada & Lovell,
1971; Murray, Bennett, & Sekuler,
2002) typically involves presenting one of two images that have been corrupted by random luminance noise and having observers identify which of the two images was presented (although response classification can be used with many different tasks and numbers of stimuli). When the noise is high in contrast, it will cause the observer to make classification errors. By correlating the contrast of the noise at each pixel location with the observer's responses across many trials, it is possible to derive a correlation map (called a “classification image”) that shows which areas of the stimulus the observer used to perform the task. Gold et al. adapted the fat/thin Kanizsa discrimination task used by Ringach and Shapley (
1996), using a fixed rotation of the inducers but varying the contrast of the stimuli across trials. The left and right columns of
Figure 1 show thin and fat stimuli, respectively, for two conditions of their experiment. In the real condition (
Figure 1A), thin black lines between the inducers physically define the contours; in the illusory condition (
Figure 1B), only the inducers appear. The center column of
Figure 1 shows the classification images (averaged over all observers and smoothed by a small convolution kernel) for the real and illusory conditions obtained by Gold et al. The dark areas in the classification images represent a negative correlation between pixel contrast at that location and a “thin” response; the white areas represent a positive correlation between pixel contrast and a thin response (the red transparent inducers in the figure have been superimposed as landmark references). In other words, the classification images indicate the locations in the stimuli that observers were using when asked to discriminate among objects defined by real or illusory contours.
Figure 1 shows that observers used the regions in between the inducers to perform the task in both conditions, although there was no stimulus information present between the inducers in the illusory condition. These results show that observers use areas that correspond to perceptually filled-in regions of the stimulus when discriminating among patterns. The similarity between the classification images for illusory and luminance-defined contours also suggests that real and interpolated contours are treated similarly by the visual system. However, it is worth noting that, strictly speaking, a classification image does not necessarily reflect the properties of an observer's visual representation of a pattern. What it does reflect is the spatial strategy or “template” used by an observer to recognize a pattern or set of patterns. Using the properties of classification images to make inferences about the spatial characteristics of visual completion requires the assumption that an observer's template is matched to the visual representation of the patterns they are attempting to recognize.