This week's Casual Friday study is the most complicated design we've done yet. However, in the spirit of Casual Fridays, it should still take only a minute or two of your time. It involves an incredibly clever visual illusion, and should be quite fun as well.
As usual, you have until 11:59 Eastern time on Wednesday, February 15, to reply. However, the study will close after 250 responses, so make sure you get your response in as soon as possible!
- Log in to post comments
More like this
As discussed last week, the comments about the perfect-scoring SAT essays published in the New York Times made me wonder whether bloggers could do any better. On the plus side, bloggers write all the time, of their own free will. On the minus side, they don't have to work under test conditions,…
Dave Munger does Friday polls calling them "Casual Fridays," but then, the usual run of posts at Cognitive Daily is a lot more serious than my usual standard. So I'll call this a "semi-formal Friday" poll, sort of the khaki pants and blue blazer of the online research world.
I'm also too lazy to…
I won't usually publish ID updates here, but I did want to remind everyone who wants to participate that this is going on - please feel free to jump in, post updates at your blog, on facebook or in the comments of the update threads (posted on Fridays) at www.sharonastyk.com. In the meantime, here…
In which we look at a prize for science blogging, a new book club, and the unhappy situation of associate professors.
------------
3quarksdaily: Sean Carroll to Judge 4th Annual 3QD Science Prize
As usual, this is the way it will work: the nominating period is now open, and will end at 11:59 pm…
Intriguing. The image in the test itself was so pale on my laptop screen that I had to push it right down (it's very good at staying clear if you move around it horizontally, but look at it from below at a highly obtuse angle vertically and it gets darker) in order to see the image at all, and no illusion of motion was present.
However, when you showed it "unveiled", the illusion was clear and present.
PS I'm glad to have got in on this one in time! Living in Australia means I sometimes completely miss out :(
Just wanted to note that, although I could not recall wihch direction either ring was moving, I did recall that they were moving in opposite directions. You may want to add a survey option to indicate this.
Thanks, David --
Unfortunately we already have 183 out of 250 responses, so we won't be able to implement it this time. We mainly included the direction condition to make respondents really think about whether they saw motion, so hopefully it won't matter that we didn't include an option for your experience.
The modified version didn't appear to move to me, but the original appeared to be rotating at a good clip. I think it was the higher contrast?