Perception of 3D shape in context: Contrast and assimilation

Whereas integration of shape and surround is held to occur through cue-dependent representations, we show that both cue-invariant and cue-dependent representations are involved. A central hinged plane and larger flanking plane were defined by either binocular disparity or motion. In a ‘within-cue’ condition, shape and surround were defined by the same cue and in a ‘cross-cue’ condition they were defined by a different cue. Observers compared the dihedral angle of the central shape with a constant reference. When the central shape was defined by disparity, the surround stimuli invoked a contrast bias in the within-cue condition, but shape assimilation occurred in the cross-cue condition. When the central shape was defined by motion there were overall no significant results, but if a contrast bias was observed, it was in the within-cue condition where integration could occur through cue-dependent representations.