Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa

Cognition does not affect perception: Evaluating the evidence for “top-down” effects

  • Chaz Firestone (a1) and Brian J. Scholl (a2)

What determines what we see? In contrast to the traditional “modular” understanding of perception, according to which visual processing is encapsulated from higher-level cognition, a tidal wave of recent research alleges that states such as beliefs, desires, emotions, motivations, intentions, and linguistic representations exert direct, top-down influences on what we see. There is a growing consensus that such effects are ubiquitous, and that the distinction between perception and cognition may itself be unsustainable. We argue otherwise: None of these hundreds of studies – either individually or collectively – provides compelling evidence for true top-down effects on perception, or “cognitive penetrability.” In particular, and despite their variety, we suggest that these studies all fall prey to only a handful of pitfalls. And whereas abstract theoretical challenges have failed to resolve this debate in the past, our presentation of these pitfalls is empirically anchored: In each case, we show not only how certain studies could be susceptible to the pitfall (in principle), but also how several alleged top-down effects actually are explained by the pitfall (in practice). Moreover, these pitfalls are perfectly general, with each applying to dozens of other top-down effects. We conclude by extracting the lessons provided by these pitfalls into a checklist that future work could use to convincingly demonstrate top-down effects on visual perception. The discovery of substantive top-down effects of cognition on perception would revolutionize our understanding of how the mind is organized; but without addressing these pitfalls, no such empirical report will license such exciting conclusions.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the or variations. ‘’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Cognition does not affect perception: Evaluating the evidence for “top-down” effects
      Available formats
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Cognition does not affect perception: Evaluating the evidence for “top-down” effects
      Available formats
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Cognition does not affect perception: Evaluating the evidence for “top-down” effects
      Available formats
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

A. L. Alter & E. Balcetis (2011) Fondness makes the distance grow shorter: Desired locations seem closer because they seem more vivid. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 47:1621.

S. Anstis (2002) Was El Greco astigmatic? Leonardo 35:208.

K. Anton-Erxleben , C. Henrich & S. Treue (2007) Attention changes perceived size of moving visual patterns. Journal of Vision 7(5):19.

E. Balcetis (2016) Approach and avoidance as organizing structures for motivated distance perception. Emotion Review 8:115–28.

E. Balcetis & D. Dunning (2006) See what you want to see: Motivational influences on visual perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 91:612–25.

E. Balcetis & D. Dunning (2010) Wishful seeing: More desired objects are seen as closer. Psychological Science 21:147–52.

E. Balcetis , D. Dunning & Y. Granot (2012) Subjective value determines initial dominance in binocular rivalry. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 48:122–29.

P. Banerjee , P. Chatterjee & J. Sinha (2012) Is it light or dark? Recalling moral behavior changes perception of brightness. Psychological Science 23:407409.

M. M. Bannert & A. Bartels (2013) Decoding the yellow of a gray banana. Current Biology 23(22):2268–72.

S. Bouvier & A. Treisman (2010) Visual feature binding requires reentry. Psychological Science 21:200204.

J. S. Bruner (1957) On perceptual readiness. Psychological Review 64:123–52.

J. S. Bruner & C. C. Goodman (1947) Value and need as organizing factors in perception. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 42:3344.

J. S. Bruner , L. Postman & J. Rodrigues (1951) Expectation and the perception of color. The American Journal of Psychology 64(2):216–27.

E. Bubl , E. Kern , D. Ebert , M. Bach & L. Tebartz van Elst (2010) Seeing gray when feeling blue? Depression can be measured in the eye of the diseased. Biological Psychiatry 68:205208.

R. Cañal-Bruland , J. R. R. Pijpers & R. R. D. Oudejans (2010) The influence of anxiety on action-specific perception. Anxiety, Stress and Coping 23:353–61.

R. Cañal-Bruland , F. F. Zhu , J. van der Kamp & R. S. W. Masters (2011) Target-directed visual attention is a prerequisite for action-specific perception. Acta Psychologica 136:285–89.

M. Carrasco , S. Ling & S. Read (2004) Attention alters appearance. Nature Neuroscience 7:308–13.

L. F. Carter & K. Schooler (1949) Value, need, and other factors in perception. Psychological Review 56:200207.

E. M. Caruso , N. L. Mead & E. Balcetis (2009) Political partisanship influences perception of biracial candidates' skin tone. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 106:20168–73.

K. R. Cave & N. P. Bichot (1999) Visuospatial attention: Beyond a spotlight model. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 6:204–23.

M. A. Changizi & W. G. Hall (2001) Thirst modulates a perception. Perception 30:1489–97.

H. Chen & B. J. Scholl (2013) Congruence with items held in visual working memory boosts invisible stimuli into awareness: Evidence from motion-induced blindness [Abstract]. Journal of Vision 13(9):808.

P. M. Churchland (1988) Perceptual plasticity and theoretical neutrality: A reply to Jerry Fodor. Philosophy of Science 55:167–87.

E. M. Clerkin , M. W. Cody , J. K. Stefanucci , D. R. Proffitt & B. A. Teachman (2009) Imagery and fear influence height perception. Journal of Anxiety Disorders 23:381–86.

M. A. Cohen , G. A. Alvarez & K. Nakayama (2011) Natural-scene perception requires attention. Psychological Science 22:1165–72.

S. Cole , E. Balcetis & D. Dunning (2012) Affective signals of threat increase perceived proximity. Psychological Science 24:3440.

S. Cole , E. Balcetis & S. Zhang (2013) Visual perception and regulatory conflict: Motivation and physiology influence distance perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 142:1822.

A. M. Collins & E. F. Loftus (1975) A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review 82:407–28.

J. A. Collins & I. R. Olson (2014) Knowledge is power: How conceptual knowledge transforms visual cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 21:843–60.

A. D. Cooper , C. P. Sterling , M. P. Bacon & B. Bridgeman (2012) Does action affect perception or memory? Vision Research 62:235–40.

S. Coren & J. T. Enns (1993) Size contrast as a function of conceptual similarity between test and inducers. Perception and Psychophysics 54:579–88.

J. Correll , B. Wittenbrink , M. T. Crawford & M. S. Sadler (2015) Stereotypic vision: How stereotypes disambiguate visual stimuli. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 108:219–33.

C. den Daas , M. Häfner & J. de Wit (2013) Sizing opportunity: Biases in estimates of goal-relevant objects depend on goal congruence. Social Psychological and Personality Science 4:362–68.

A. T. Dils & L. Boroditsky (2010a) Processing unrelated language can change what you see. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 17:882–88.

A. T. Dils & L. Boroditsky (2010b) Visual motion aftereffect from understanding motion language. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 107:16396–400.

A. Doerrfeld , N. Sebanz & M. Shiffrar (2012) Expecting to lift a box together makes the load look lighter. Psychological Research 76:467–75.

D. Dunning & E. Balcetis (2013) Wishful seeing: How preferences shape visual perception. Current Directions in Psychological Science 22:3337.

F. H. Durgin , J. A. Baird , M. Greenburg , R. Russell , K. Shaughnessy & S. Waymouth (2009) Who is being deceived? The experimental demands of wearing a backpack. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 16:964–69.

F. H. Durgin , D. DeWald , S. Lechich , Z. Li & Z. Ontiveros (2011a) Action and motivation: Measuring perception or strategies? Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 18(6):1077–82.

M. Erdelyi (1974) A new look at the new look: Perceptual defense and vigilance. Psychological Review 81:125.

C. Firestone (2013a) How “paternalistic” is spatial perception? Why wearing a heavy backpack doesn't – and couldn't – make hills look steeper. Perspectives on Psychological Science 8:455–73.

C. Firestone (2013b) On the origin and status of the “El Greco fallacy.Perception 42:672–74.

C. Firestone & B. J. Scholl (2014b) “Top-down” effects where none should be found: The El Greco fallacy in perception research. Psychological Science 25:3846.

C. Firestone & B. J. Scholl (2015a) Can you experience top-down effects on perception? The case of race categories and perceived lightness. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 22:694700.

C. Firestone & B. J. Scholl (2015b) Enhanced visual awareness for morality and pajamas? Perception vs. memory in ‘top-down’ effects. Cognition 136:409–16.

J. A. Fodor (1984) Observation reconsidered. Philosophy of Science 51:2343.

J. A. Fodor (1988) A reply to Churchland's “Perceptual plasticity and theoretical neutrality.Philosophy of Science 55:188–98.

A. P. Gantman & J. J. Van Bavel (2014) The moral pop-out effect: Enhanced perceptual awareness of morally relevant stimuli. Cognition 132:2229.

T. Gao , G. McCarthy & B. J. Scholl (2010) The wolfpack effect: Perception of animacy irresistibly influences interactive behavior. Psychological Science 21:1845–53.

M. N. Geuss , J. K. Stefanucci , J. de Benedictis-Kessner & N. R. Stevens (2010) A balancing act: Physical balance, through arousal, influences size perception. Attention, Perception and Psychophysics 72:1890–902.

C. D. Gilbert & W. Li (2013) Top-down influences on visual processing. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 14(5):350–63.

A. Gilchrist & A. Jacobsen (1984) Perception of lightness and illumination in a world of one reflectance. Perception 13:519.

J. Gobell & M. Carrasco (2005) Attention alters the appearance of spatial frequency and gap size. Psychological Science 16:644–51.

R. L. Goldstone (1995) Effects of categorization on color perception. Psychological Science 6:298304.

R. L. Goldstone & L. W. Barsalou (1998) Reuniting perception and conception. Cognition 65:231–62.

R. L. Goldstone , J. R. de Leeuw & D. H. Landy (2015) Fitting perception in and to cognition. Cognition 135:2429.

R. Gray & R. Cañal-Bruland (2015) Attentional focus, perceived target size, and movement kinematics under performance pressure. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 22:16921700.

R. Gray , J. A. Navia & J. Allsop (2014) Action-specific effects in aviation: What determines judged runway size? Perception 43:145–54.

R. L. Gregory (1980) Perceptions as hypotheses. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 290(1038):181–97.

T. Hansen , M. Giesel & K. R. Gegenfurtner (2008) Chromatic discrimination of natural objects. Journal of Vision 8(2):119.

T. Hansen , M. Olkkonen , S. Walter & K. R. Gegenfurtner (2006) Memory modulates color appearance. Nature Neuroscience 9(11):1367–68. Available at:

K. D. Harber , D. Yeung & A. Iacovelli (2011) Psychosocial resources, threat, and the perception of distance and height: Support for the resources and perception model. Emotion 11:1080–90.

G. Kanizsa (1985) Seeing and thinking. Acta Psychologica 59:2333.

W. Kirsch (2015) Impact of action planning on spatial perception: Attention matters. Acta Psychologica 156:2231.

W. Kirsch & W. Kunde (2013a) Moving further moves things further away in visual perception: Position-based movement planning affects distance judgments. Experimental Brain Research 226:431–40.

G. S. Klein , H. J. Schlesinger & D. E. Meister (1951) The effect of personal values on perception: An experimental critique. Psychological Review 58:96–12.

N. Klemfuss , W. Prinzmetal & R. B. Ivry (2012) How does language change perception: A cautionary note. Frontiers in Psychology 3:Article 78. Available at:

S. M. Kosslyn (2005) Mental images and the brain. Cognitive Neuropsychology 22:333–47.

J. Krauskopf & K. Gegenfurtner (1992) Color discrimination and adaptation. Vision Research 32:2165–75.

D. Krpan & S. Schnall (2014) Too close for comfort: Stimulus valence moderates the influence of motivational orientation on distance perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 107:978–93.

A. N. Landau , L. Aziz-Zadeh & R. B. Ivry (2010) The influence of language on perception: Listening to sentences about faces affects the perception of faces. The Journal of Neuroscience 30(45):15254–61. Available at:

D. Landis , J. M. Jones & J. Reiter (1966) Two experiments on perceived size of coins. Perceptual and Motor Skills 23:719–29.

R. S. Lazarus , H. Yousem & D. Arenberg (1953) Hunger and perception. Journal of Personality 21:312–28.

D. Le Bihan , R. Turner , T. A. Zeffiro , C. A. Cuénod , P. Jezzard & V. Bonnerot (1993) Activation of human primary visual cortex during visual recall: A magnetic resonance imaging study. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 90:11802–805.

D. H. Lee , R. Mirza , J. G. Flanagan & A. K. Anderson (2014) Optical origins of opposing facial expression actions. Psychological Science 25(3):745–52. Available at:

L. Léger & E. Chauvet (2015) When canary primes yellow: Effects of semantic memory on overt attention. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 22:200205.

D. A. Lessard , S. A. Linkenauger & D. R. Proffitt (2009) Look before you leap: Jumping ability affects distance perception. Perception 38:1863–66.

D. T. Levin & M. R. Banaji (2006) Distortions in the perceived lightness of faces: The role of race categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 135:501–12.

D. T. Levin , Y. Takarae , A. G. Miner & F. Keil (2001) Efficient visual search by category: Specifying the features that mark the difference between artifacts and animals in preattentive vision. Perception and Psychophysics 63:676–97.

J.-L. Li & S.-L. Yeh (2003) Do “Chinese and American see opposite apparent motions in a Chinese character”? Tse and Cavanagh (2000) replicated and revised. Visual Cognition 10:537–47.

L. A. Lo Sciuto & E. L. Hartley (1963) Religious affiliation and open-mindedness in binocular resolution. Perceptual and Motor Skills 17:427–30.

G. M. Long & T. C. Toppino (2004) Enduring interest in perceptual ambiguity: Alternating views of reversible figures. Psychological Bulletin 130:748–68.

G. Lupyan (2012) Linguistically modulated perception and cognition: The label-feedback hypothesis. Frontiers in Psychology 3:Article 54.

G. Lupyan & M. J. Spivey (2008) Perceptual processing is facilitated by ascribing meaning to novel stimuli. Current Biology 18:R410–12.

G. Lupyan , S. L. Thompson-Schill & D. Swingley (2010) Conceptual penetration of visual processing. Psychological Science 21(5):682–91.

G. Lupyan & E. J. Ward (2013) Language can boost otherwise unseen objects into visual awareness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 110(35):14196–201. Available at:

E. Machery (2015) Cognitive penetrability: A no-progress report. In: The cognitive penetrability of perception: New philosophical perspectives, ed. J. Zeimbekis & A. Raftopoulos . Oxford University Press.

F. Macpherson (2012) Cognitive penetration of colour experience: Rethinking the issue in light of an indirect mechanism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 84(1):2462.

J. K. Maner , D. T. Kenrick , D. V. Becker , T. E. Robertson , B. Hofer , S. L. Neuberg , A.W. Delton , J. Butner & M. Schaller (2005) Functional projection: How fundamental social motives can bias interpersonal perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 88:6378.

M. E. Masson & R. Borowsky (1998) More than meets the eye: Context effects in word identification. Memory and Cognition 26:1245–69.

R. Masters , J. Poolton & J. van der Kamp (2010) Regard and perceptions of size in soccer: Better is bigger. Perception 39:1290–95.

H. G. McCurdy (1956) Coin perception studies and the concept of schemata. Psychological Review 63:160–68.

B. P. Meier , M. D. Robinson , L. E. Crawford & W. J. Ahlvers (2007) When “light” and “dark” thoughts become light and dark responses: Affect biases brightness judgments. Emotion 7(2):366–76. Available at:

L. Meteyard , B. Bahrami & G. Vigliocco (2007) Motion detection and motion verbs language affects low-level visual perception. Psychological Science 18:1007–13.

D. E. Meyer & R. W. Schvaneveldt (1971) Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: Evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology 90:227–34.

S. B. Most , B. J. Scholl , E. R. Clifford & D. J. Simons (2005b) What you see is what you set: Sustained inattentional blindness and the capture of awareness. Psychological Review 112:217–42.

J. J. New & T. C. German (2015) Spiders at the cocktail party: An ancestral threat that surmounts inattentional blindness. Evolution and Human Behavior 36:165–73.

M. Olkkonen , T. Hansen & K. R. Gegenfurtner (2008) Color appearance of familiar objects: Effects of object shape, texture, and illumination changes. Journal of Vision 8(5):116.

Y. Pan , B. Lin , Y. Zhao & D. Soto (2014) Working memory biasing of visual perception without awareness. Attention, Perception and Psychophysics 76:2051–62.

D. Pascucci & M. Turatto (2013) Immediate effect of internal reward on visual adaptation. Psychological Science 24:1317–22.

M. A. Peterson & B. S. Gibson (1993) Shape recognition inputs to figure-ground organization in three-dimensional displays. Cognitive Psychology 25:383–29.

M. A. Peterson & B. S. Gibson (1994) Object recognition contributions to figure-ground organization: Operations on outlines and subjective contours. Perception and Psychophysics 56:551–64.

S. Pitts , J. P. Wilson & K. Hugenberg (2014) When one is ostracized, others loom: Social rejection makes other people appear closer. Social Psychological and Personality Science 5:550–57.

J. Prinz & A. Seidel (2012) Alligator or squirrel: Musically induced fear reveals threat in ambiguous figures. Perception 41:1535–39.

D. R. Proffitt (2006) Embodied perception and the economy of action. Perspectives on Psychological Science 1:110–22.

D. R. Proffitt & S. A. Linkenauger (2013) Perception viewed as a phenotypic expression. In: Action science: Foundations of an emerging discipline, ed. W. Prinz , M. Beisert & A. Herwig , pp. 171–98. MIT Press.

D. R. Proffitt , J. K. Stefanucci , T. Banton & W. Epstein (2003) The role of effort in perceiving distance. Psychological Science 14:106–12.

Z. Pylyshyn (1999) Is vision continuous with cognition? The case for cognitive impenetrability of visual perception. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22(3):341–65.

R. Radel & C. Clément-Guillotin (2012) Evidence of motivational influences in early visual perception: Hunger modulates conscious access. Psychological Science 23:232–34.

A. Raftopoulos (2001a) Is perception informationally encapsulated? The issue of the theory-ladenness of perception. Cognitive Science 25:423–51.

A. Raftopoulos (2001b) Reentrant neural pathways and the theory-ladenness of perception. Philosophy of Science 68:S187–99.

V. Ramachandran (1988) Perception of shape from shading. Nature 331:163–66.

M. Riccio , S. Cole & E. Balcetis (2013) Seeing the expected, the desired, and the feared: Influences on perceptual interpretation and directed attention. Social and Personality Psychology Compass 7:401–14.

C. R. Riener , J. K. Stefanucci , D. R. Proffitt & G. L. Clore (2011) An effect of mood on the perception of geographical slant. Cognition and Emotion 25:174–82.

J. H. Riskind , R. Moore & L. Bowley (1995) The looming of spiders: The fearful perceptual distortion of movement and menace. Behaviour Research and Therapy 33:171–78.

M. Rolfs , M. Dambacher & P. Cavanagh (2013) Visual adaptation of the perception of causality. Current Biology 23(3):250–54. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2012.12.017.

E. T. Rolls (2008) Top–down control of visual perception: Attention in natural vision. Perception 37:333–54.

R. Rosenthal & D. B. Rubin (1978) Interpersonal expectancy effects: The first 345 studies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 1:377–86.

N. C. Rust , V. Mante , E. P. Simoncelli & J. A. Movshon (2006) How MT cells analyze the motion of visual patterns. Nature Neuroscience 9:1421–31.

S. Schnall , J. R. Zadra & D. R. Proffitt (2010) Direct evidence for the economy of action: Glucose and the perception of geographical slant. Perception 39:464–82.

B. J. Scholl (2001) Objects and attention: The state of the art. Cognition 80:146.

B. J. Scholl & T. Gao (2013) Perceiving animacy and intentionality: Visual processing or higher-level judgment? In: Social perception: Detection and interpretation of animacy, agency, and intention, ed. M. D. Rutherford & V. A. Kuhlmeier , pp. 197230. MIT Press.

B. J. Scholl & A. M. Leslie (1999) Modularity, development and “theory of mind.Mind and Language 14:131–53.

B. J. Scholl & P. D. Tremoulet (2000) Perceptual causality and animacy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4:299309.

R. Sekuler , A. B. Sekuler & R. Lau (1997) Sound alters visual motion perception. Nature 385:308.

D. M. Shaffer & M. Flint (2011) Escalating slant: Increasing physiological potential does not reduce slant overestimates. Psychological Science 22:209–11.

D. M. Shaffer , E. McManama , C. Swank & F. H. Durgin (2013) Sugar and space? Not the case: Effects of low blood glucose on slant estimation are mediated by beliefs. i-Perception 4:147–55.

L. Shams , Y. Kamitani & S. Shimojo (2000) Illusions: What you see is what you hear. Nature 408:788.

L. Shams , Y. Kamitani & S. Shimojo (2002) Visual illusion induced by sound. Cognitive Brain Research 14:147–52.

S. Siegel (2012) Cognitive penetrability and perceptual justification. Noûs 46:201–22.

D. J. Simons (1996) In sight, out of mind: When object representations fail. Psychological Science 7:301305.

D. J. Simons & C. F. Chabris (1999) Gorillas in our midst: Sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events. Perception 28:1059–74.

A. Sklar , N. Levy , A. Goldstein , R. Mandel , A. Maril & R. Hassin (2012) Reading and doing arithmetic nonconsciously. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 109:19614–19.

H. Song , A. J. Vonasch , B. P. Meier & J. A. Bargh (2012) Brighten up: Smiles facilitate perceptual judgment of facial lightness. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 48:450–52.

J. K. Stefanucci , K. T. Gagnon & D. A. Lessard (2011) Follow your heart: Emotion adaptively influences perception. Social and Personality Psychology Compass 5:296308.

J. K. Stefanucci , K. T. Gagnon , C. L. Tompkins & K. E. Bullock (2012) Plunging into the pool of death: Imagining a dangerous outcome influences distance perception. Perception 41:111.

J. K. Stefanucci & M. N. Geuss (2009) Big people, little world: The body influences size perception. Perception 38:1782–95.

J. K. Stefanucci & J. J. Storbeck (2009) Don't look down: Emotional arousal elevates height perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 138:131–45.

D. Stokes (2013) Cognitive penetrability of perception. Philosophy Compass 8:646–63.

D. Stokes (2014) Cognitive penetration and the perception of art. Dialectica 68:134.

J. Storbeck & G. L. Clore (2008) Affective arousal as information: How affective arousal influences judgments, learning, and memory. Social and Personality Psychology Compass 2:1824–43.

J. Storbeck & J. K. Stefanucci (2014) Conditions under which arousal does and does not elevate height estimates. PLoS ONE 9:e92024.

M. Sugovic & J. K. Witt (2013) An older view on distance perception: Older adults perceive walkable extents as farther. Experimental Brain Research 226:383–91.

J. E. T. Taylor , J. K. Witt & M. Sugovic (2011) When walls are no longer barriers: Perception of wall height in parkour. Perception 40:757–60.

B. A. Teachman , J. K. Stefanucci , E. M. Clerkin , M. W. Cody & D. R. Proffitt (2008) A new mode of fear expression: Perceptual bias in height fear. Emotion 8:296301.

T. C. Toppino (2003) Reversible-figure perception: Mechanisms of intentional control. Perception and Psychophysics 65:1285–95.

P. U. Tse (2005) Voluntary attention modulates the brightness of overlapping transparent surfaces. Vision Research 45:1095–98.

P. U. Tse & P. Cavanagh (2000) Chinese and Americans see opposite apparent motions in a Chinese character. Cognition 74:B2732.

G. M. van Koningsbruggen , W. Stroebe & H. Aarts (2011) Through the eyes of dieters: Biased size perception of food following tempting food primes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 47:293–99.

N. R. van Ulzen , G. R. Semin , R. R. D. Oudejans & P. J. Beek (2008) Affective stimulus properties influence size perception and the Ebbinghaus illusion. Psychological Research 72:304–10.

P. Vetter & A. Newen (2014) Varieties of cognitive penetration in visual perception. Consciousness and Cognition 27:6275.

T. J. Vickery , M. M. Chun & D. Lee (2011) Ubiquity and specificity of reinforcement signals throughout the human brain. Neuron 72:166–77.

C. J. Wakslak & B. K. Kim (2015) Controllable objects seem closer. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 144:522–27.

E. J. Ward & B. J. Scholl (2015) Inattentional blindness reflects limitations on perception, not memory: Evidence from repeated failures of awareness. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 22:722–27.

M. A. Webster & P. Kay (2012) Color categories and color appearance. Cognition 122:375–92.

R. Wesp , P. Cichello , E. B. Gracia & K. Davis (2004) Observing and engaging in purposeful actions with objects influences estimates of their size. Perception and Psychophysics 66:1261–67.

R. Wesp & J. Gasper (2012) Is size misperception of targets simply justification for poor performance? Perception 41:994–96.

J. K. Witt (2011a) Action's effect on perception. Current Directions in Psychological Science 20:201206.

J. K. Witt & T. E. Dorsch (2009) Kicking to bigger uprights: Field goal kicking performance influences perceived size. Perception 38:1328–40.

J. K. Witt , S. A. Linkenauger , J. Z. Bakdash & D. R. Proffitt (2008) Putting to a bigger hole: Golf performance relates to perceived size. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 15:581–85.

J. K. Witt & D. R. Proffitt (2005) See the ball, hit the ball. Psychological Science 16:937–38.

J. K. Witt , D. R. Proffitt & W. Epstein (2004) Perceiving distance: A role of effort and intent. Perception 33:577–90.

J. K. Witt & M. Sugovic (2010) Performance and ease influence perceived speed. Perception 39(10):1341–53. doi:10.1068/P6699.

J. K. Witt , D. M. Schuck & J. E. T. Taylor (2011) Action-specific effects underwater. Perception 40:530–37.

C. Witzel , H. Valkova , T. Hansen & K. R. Gegenfurtner (2011) Object knowledge modulates colour appearance. i-Perception 2(1):1349.

E. Yee , S. Z. Ahmed & S. L. Thompson-Schill (2012) Colorless green ideas (can) prime furiously. Psychological Science 23:364–69.

J. Zeimbekis & A. Raftopoulos , eds. (2015) Cognitive effects on perception: New philosophical perspectives. Oxford University Press.

S. Zhang , M. Xu , T. Kamigaki , J. P. Hoang Do , W. C. Chang & S. Jenvay (2014) Long-range and local circuits for top-down modulation of visual cortex processing. Science 345:660–65.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Behavioral and Brain Sciences
  • ISSN: 0140-525X
  • EISSN: 1469-1825
  • URL: /core/journals/behavioral-and-brain-sciences
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 395
Total number of PDF views: 2580 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 8272 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 21st September 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.