A black, red and blue line are obscured by a grey rectangle.
Media Licence:
CC BY-SA 3.0
Media Source:
Adapted from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poggendorff_illusion#/media/File:Poggendorff_illusion.svg

Illusion Credit

Johann Christian Poggendorff (1796 - 1877), German physicist

Instructions

Focus on the black line and follow it downwards towards the blue and red lines. Note that it appears to be continuous with the blue line, not the red line. Hover your cursor over the image and see if that is correct.

Effect

Although the black line appears continuous with the blue line it is actually continuous with the red line. 

A black, red and blue line are obscured by a grey rectangle.
Media Licence:
CC BY-SA 3.0
Media Source:
Adapted from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poggendorff_illusion#/media/File:Poggendorff_illusion.svg

Illusion Credit

Johann Christian Poggendorff (1796 - 1877), German physicist
  • Poggendorff Illusion

The Poggendorff Illusion was discovered by Johann Christian Poggendorff (1796 - 1877), a German physicist. He discoverd it the drawings of Johann Karl Friedrich Zöllner (1834 - 1882), a German astrophysicist with a keen interest in optical illusions. Poggendorff was editor of the journal to which Zöllner submitted drawings in support of his paper reporting what is now known as the Zöllner Illusion. The Poggendorff Illusion was first published in the journal Annalen der Physik in 1860.

The Poggendorff Illusion is one among a number of illusions where a central aspect of a simple line image – e.g. the length, straightness, or parallelism of lines – appears distorted by other aspects of the image – e.g. other background/foreground lines, or other intersecting shapes. These are sometimes called ‘geometrical-optical illusions’. You can search for other geometric illusions in the Illusions Index.

There are a number of general hypotheses for how the broader type of illusion of which the Poggendorff illusion is an example works. One is that our perceptual systems have a tendency to ‘expand’ acute angles—that is to represent them as larger angles than they really are. In the case of the Poggendorff Illusion, the grey foreground rectangle which intersects the narrow straight lines causes the visual system to enhance the orientation contrast between the lines and rectangle—i.e. to ‘expand’ the acute angles at the relevant points of intersection. This, in turn, causes the appearance of a misalignment in the lines. Exactly why our perceptual systems have a tendency to expand acute angles is still being investigated. For a detailed discussion of the phenomenon of acute angle expansion, see Westheimer (2008).

One piece of evidence which, at the very least, complicates the acute-angle expansion hypothesis in the case of the Poggendorff Illusion is that the illusion does not seem to persist through a rotational change. Consider, for example, the version of the illusion below where the entire image has been rotated by 31 degrees:

It is perhaps not immediately obvious why, if the acute angle expansion hypothesis were correct, the illusion should no longer be present simply because the image has been rotated 31 degrees so that the narrow lines are vertical and the grey rectangle is not vertical. Those who favour some version of the acute angle expansion hypothesis have endeavoured to explain this phenomenon whilst retaining the hypothesis (for discussion of this and related points, see: Green & Hoyle 1963; Gregory 1968; Day 1973; Weintraub et al. 1980; Greist-Bousquet & Schiffman 1981; Spehar & Gillam 1998; Morgan 1999; Westheimer & Wehrhahn 1997; Westheimer 2008).

The Poggendorff Illusion is interesting because it is relevant to debates about modularity, cognitive penetration, and the nature of experience. To explain: on the hypothesis that the mind is modular, a mental module is a kind of semi-independent department of the mind which deals with particular types of inputs, and gives particular types of outputs, and whose inner workings are not accessible to the conscious awareness of the person—all one can get access to are the relevant outputs. So, in the case of the Poggendorff Illusion, a standard way of explaining why experience of the illusion persists even though one knows that one is experiencing an illusion is that the module, or modules, which constitute the visual system are ‘cognitively impenetrable’ to some degree—i.e. their inner workings and outputs cannot be influenced by conscious awareness. For a general discussion of cognitive penetration, see Macpherson (2012).

Philosophers have also been interested in what illusions like the Poggendorff Illusion can tell us about the nature of experience. For example, in the case of experiencing the Poggendorff Illusion, it would seem to be that the one can know that the vertical red lines are straight whilst at the same time experience them as curved. If so, then this might count against the claim the perceptual states are belief like, because if perceptual states were belief like then, when experiencing the Poggendorff Illusion one would simultaneously believe that the lines were straight and not straight. This would seem to entail that one was being irrational, because one would simultaneously be holding contradictory beliefs. But it seems highly implausible that one is being irrational when under going this illusion. For discussion of this general point about whether perceptions are like beliefs, see Crane & French (2016).

References

Crane, T., and French, C., 2016. The Problem of Perception. In: Zalta, E. N., ed. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, CSLI, Stanford University.

Day, R.H., 1973. The oblique line illusion: The Poggendorff effect without parallels. The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology, 25(4), pp.535-541.

Green, R.T. and Hoyle, E.M., 1963. The Poggendorff illusion as a constancy phenomenon. Nature, 200, pp.611-612.

Gregory, R.L., 1968. Perceptual illusions and brain models. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 171(1024), pp.279-296.

Greist-Bousquet, S. and Schiffman, H.R., 1981. The Poggendorff illusion: An illusion of linear extent?. Perception, 10(2), pp.155-164.

Macpherson, F., 2012. Cognitive penetration of colour experience: Rethinking the issue in light of an indirect mechanism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 84(1), pp.24-62.

Morgan, M.J., 1999. The Poggendorff illusion: a bias in the estimation of the orientation of virtual lines by second-stage filters. Vision Research, 39(14), pp.2361-2380.

Spehar, B. and Gillam, B.J., 1998. Modal and amodal completion in the Poggendorff illusion. Perception ECVP abstract, 27, pp.0-0.

Weintraub, D.J., Krantz, D.H. and Olson, T.P., 1980. The Poggendorff illusion: Consider all the angles. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 6(4), p.718.

Westheimer, G. and Wehrhahn, C., 1997. Real and virtual borders in the Poggendorff illusion. Perception, 26(12), pp.1495-1501.

Westheimer, G., 2008. Illusions in the spatial sense of the eye: Geometrical–optical illusions and the neural representation of space. Vision research, 48(20), pp.2128-2142.

Zöllner, F., 1860. Ueber eine neue Art von Pseudoskopie und ihre Beziehungen zu den von Plateau und Oppel beschrieben Bewegungsphaenomenen. Annalen der Physik, 186 (none), pp.500–25.

How To Cite This Article

Author and Citation Info

Please cite this article as follows:

Donaldson, J. and Macpherson, F. (July 2017), "Poggendorff Illusion" in F. Macpherson (ed.), The Illusions Index. Retrieved from https://www.illusionsindex.org/ir/poggendorff-illusion.

Citation copied to clipboard

This article is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC_SA 4.0)

Suggest an Illusion

Suggest an Illusion

Explore the Illusions Index

Explore Illusions

Found an error?

Report it to let us know - we'll get it fixed as soon as possible.

Report an Error