Gestalt laws explore the way people tend to perceive a whole object rather than a sum of its parts. One of these rules is the law of closure. This particular principle of the Gestalt approach states that if a figure has a gap in its form, people still perceive it as a complete and closed figure (Foley & Matlin, 2010). This law is often used in graphic design, which can be seen in the following example (“Closure,” 2017). As it can be observed in this image, the shape of the panda is incomplete. However, one’s knowledge about these animals helps to fill in the undefined white part of the panda’s body, and the image gains meaning. This particular picture illustrates the law of closure as people see this incomplete figure as a complete object. Thus, the parts of the stimulus do not matter to one’s perception as much as the whole figure.
The concept of Gestalt psychology can be explained by this example, as it states that people often value the sum more than its separate parts. Here, the missing information is completed by the individual’s perception, which also correlates with this theory. One can consider the notion that people fill in these shapes to be complete in order to find particular meaning in figures and objects that may not have them. It relates to Gestalt psychology in a way that individuals feel the need to organize objects and find patterns in a chaotic environment. The principle of amodal completion allows people to complete perceived forms in their mind without any additional effort (Foley & Matlin, 2010). In fact, most individuals develop this ability during their childhood, which allows them to change their perception and alter their understanding of seen objects.
As was mentioned before, the law of closure is often used in advertising and graphic design. What can explain the popularity of this particular principle? Why do people choose to use the laws of Gestalt psychology in brand logos?
Illusions
There are many types of illusions that use the concepts of size and distance in illustrations. For example, this image of multiple men standing on a street shows how perspective can change one’s view of size. Here, the men that are positioned on the left side of the image appear smaller than persons situated on the right side (“Perspective illusion,” 2017). This effect can be explained by the connection between one’s understanding of perspective and the lines used in this image. In this case, the borders of the background imply that the right part of the image is situated farther than the left side. Therefore, the objects that appear on the right will look smaller than the ones of the same size on the left as they are supposed to be located at a greater distance. The shape of the man on the right is not smaller. Thus, most individuals interpret his size to be bigger than the rest of the men in the image. In the end, the illusion is created by the background.
While many images implement this illusion, this simple drawing still manages to confuse one’s perception. This example shows that the basic principles of perspective influence one’s view of objects and shapes. What makes the factor of perspective so powerful to one’s understanding that even such a simple drawing creates an illusion of size?
Quiz Answers
Question 1
The feature-integration approach and the prototype-matching approach have their similarities and differences. Both types of perception focus on object recognition and attention. One the one hand, the first theory suggests that people have to continuously update their understanding of an object in order to perceive it in its current state. On the other hand, the second idea implies that the individuals have an ideal representation of a particular object, which they use to distinguish all forms of this figure (Foley & Matlin, 2010). This difference shows that people can always learn new information about different entities and integrate necessary features into their understanding while having an idealized version of all objects in their minds.
The aspect of attention is more important in the feature-integration approach, as it usually deals with shapes that are different from each other in some way. Here, people choose a set of particular features that an object can have. For example, the color and shape of an object may play a significant role in one’s interpretation of it. On the other hand, the prototype-matching approach deals with similarities of forms rather than their differences. The example of the letter “m” by Foley and Matlin (2010) shows that details of the shape and its particular color are not as important as the overall understanding of the letter’s form. One can recognize this letter in different fonts, sizes, and colors by using a stored example of it in their mind.
Question 2
The creation of written languages led to people learing to give meanings to specific forms and interpreting them as letters of a language. These letters are usually presented in the form of words, which are perceived by people as complete entities. Thus, letters often exist in the context of words. Many researchers explore the notion that people see letters easier if they are grouped in words (Foley & Matlin, 2010). The effect of word superiority plays a significant role in one’s perception of separate letters. As opposed to words, chains of letters that do not have any meaning and are hard to pronounce are also hard to remember. It is possible that separate letters in words can be perceived easier because people know the contents of these words and can deconstruct each word faster than a chain of random letters.
Otherwise known as the word-apprehension effect, this phenomenon confirms that people see words as both completed objects and sums of other entities (Foley & Matlin, 2010). The structure of existing words is comprehensible by the human mind, which most likely makes the process of letter recognition easy. On the other hand, a chain of letters that do not possess any meaning requires people to perceive each letter independently, which does not allow for a meaning interpretation.
Question 3
People analyze and determine the place of objects using monocular and binocular cues to depth. While monocular cues can use one eye to collect and examine all necessary information, binocular cues need both eyes to work. There are many monocular cues that a person can use to determine the place of an object in space. Such characteristics as occlusion, size, linear perspective, texture gradient, shading, atmospheric perspective, and height can help an individual to perceive an object in a 3D space (Foley & Matlin, 2010). These cues are pictorial, which means that they can be used in static images to recreate the depth of reality. Movement cues, on the other hand, can be used by a person to determine depth in motion. Binocular cues are defined by binocular disparity, which implies that there is a small difference between the images which people receive through their right and left eyes.
While most cues are monocular, the importance of binocular disparity should not be undermined. As Lebreton, Raake, Barkowsky, and Le Callet (2014) point out, it is hard to measure the importance of binocular cues as they are closely connected to monocular cues in the process of depth interpretation. However, one can use only monocular cues to determine the positions of objects and their distances from each other, although the adequacy of these perceptions is questionable.
Question 4
The concept of size constancy implies that people, seeing an object from different distances, understand that its size remains the same, although the proportion of its retinal image changes (Foley & Matlin, 2010). For instance, if a person walks towards a house, he or she will not think that this building grows in size while the retinal image of the house does become bigger. This concept allows people to understand the place of objects in space and estimate their distance and position. Moreover, this idea functions for both familiar and novel objects in the same way. People can see a car in the distance for the first time and estimate its actual size based on its perceived image and egotistical distance. Alternatively, the size of some unknown objects can also be comprehended by individuals without the need to compare them to other shapes.
According to Hatfield (2014), such factors as the visual angle and the perceived distance of an object play the most critical roles in one’s estimation of size. Both elements are significant as the combination of them allows people to assume objects’ position and size correctly. For example, the size of a small entity that is positioned near a person will not be confused with the size of a large object that is situated far away.
References
Closure [Image]. (2017). Web.
Foley, H., & Matlin, M. (2010). Sensation and perception (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Hatfield, G. (2014). Psychological experiments and phenomenal experience in size and shape constancy. Philosophy of Science, 81(5), 940-953.
Lebreton, P., Raake, A., Barkowsky, M., & Le Callet, P. (2014). Measuring perceived depth in natural images and study of its relation with monocular and binocular depth cues. In SPIE Electronic Imaging 2014 (pp. 1-11). San Francisco, CA: SPIE.
Perspective illusion [Image]. (2017). Web.