The Necker Cube is often used to study depth perception and abiguity. It is a three dimensional cube sketched or printed on a two dimensional surace. When one focuses on the cube the perspective, or orientation, of the three dimensional appearance is known to reverse, or "flip." The effects of learning have been studied with regard to the Necker Cube. It seems as if the longer one focuses on the cube, the more it flips. In this study I will not only take another look at the effect practice has on the ability to flip the orientation of the cube, but also at the effect practice has on the ability to prevent the cube from flipping once one has learned to flip it.
Methods: Participants included 12 volunteer undergraduates of Alma College. The stimuli consisted of one figure of the Necker Cube on the screen of a computer. The figure remained contant to assure that any change in orientation was due to the illusion. The figure was designed using the "Eye Lines" software accessible through the Alma College Psychology Department.
Each participant will take approximately 8 minutes to complete the experiment. During the first 2 minutes the participant will focus on the figure of the Necker Cube, or changes orientation. At the end of the first 2 minutes, the participant will take a 1 minute break while the new experiment file is opened. When the break period is over the participant will again focus back on the figure only this time attempting to prevent it from flipping. If or when the figure does flip, the participant will again strike any key on the keyboard each time it does so. This too will continue for the next 2 minutes of the experiment. This cycle will be repeated with 2 more minutes of flipping, then 2 more minutes of holding.
For each participant, time spans between changes in orientation will be recorded by the computer. The data gathered will allow comparison of the frequency of the flips at the beginning and end of the 2 minute time periods. This data will lead to whether or not practice or learning has and effect on avoiding reversal of the Necker Cube.
Results: The number of flips during the "flip" periods were greater than the number of flips during the "hold" periods as shown in the graph below.
The time difference between flips, however, comparing the flip periods to the hold periods, did not turn out to be of any help. As the figures for each participant were very spread out, the times showed no consistency.
Figure 2: Difference in time passed (in seconds) between flips from the beginning and end of the 2 minute time spans. Time spans between each flip for the first half of the flips were averaged as well as the time spans for the second half. The first average was then subtracted from the second average.
The above graph shows that the average time difference did not come out as predicted. The time difference during the hold periods actually were less than the time difference during the flip periods.
Discussion: The number of flips did show a trend possibly implying that one has the ability to keep the object from flipping for a short time, but cannot train the eyes to keep the cube constantly still. There does seem to be some sort of control, but no change in control over time. However, my research turned out to be inconsistent both with previous studies and with my predictions that learning would have an effect of the ability to keep the Necker Cube from "flipping." There was no significant trend in the data to show any sort of effect of practice.
More Posters
Web Posters from other courses and projects
Alma College Psychology Department